'I struggled with this money business': Respondents' perspectives on contingent valuation

Ecological Economics

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 45-62

  Clark, Judy ^a   Burgess, Jacquelin ^a   Harrison, Carolyn M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation; Cultural values; Nature conservation policy; Qualitative research

Indexed keywords

CONTINGENT VALUATION; ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS; NATURE CONSERVATION; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 0034072021     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00118-4     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Addiscott T., Smith J., Bradbury N. Critical evaluation of models and their parameters. J. Environ. Qual. 24:1995;803-807.
2. Bateman J., Turner R.K. Valuation of the environment, methods and techniques: the contingent valuation method. Turner R.K. Sustainable Environmental Economics and Management: Principles and Practice. 1993;120-191 Belhaven Press, London.
3. Blamey R.M., Quiggin J. Respondents to contingent valuation surveys: consumers or citizens? Aust. J. Agric. Econ. 39:1995;263-288.
4. Boyle K.J., Desvousges W.H., Johnson F.R., Dunford R.W., Hudson S.P. An investigation of part-whole biases in contingent valuation studies. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 27:1994;64-83.
5. Bromley D. The ideology of efficiency: searching for a theory of policy analysis. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 19:1990;86-107.
6. Brouwer, R., Powe, N., Turner, R.K., Bateman, I.J. and Langford, I.H., 1999. Public attitudes to contingent valuation and public consultation. Environ. Values, (in press).
7. Burgess J., Limb M., Harrison C.M. Exploring environmental values through the medium of small groups: part 1, theory and practice. Environ. Plan. A. 20:1988;309-326.
8. Burgess J., Limb M., Harrison C.M. Exploring environmental values through the medium of small groups: part 2, illustrations of a group at work. Environ. Plan. A. 20:1988;457-476.
9. Burgess J., Harrison C.M., Fikus P. Environmental communication and the cultural politics of environmental citizenship. Environ. Plan. A. 30:1998;1445-1460.
10. Chilton S.M., Hutchinson W.G. Exploring divergence between respondent and researcher definitions of the good in contingent valuation studies. J. Agri. Econ. 50:1999;1-16.
11. Clark J. Cornflakes and corncrakes: issues in valuing nature. Guerrier Y., Alexander N., Chase J., O'Brien M. Values and the Environment: A Social Science Perspective. 1995;81-93 Wiley, Chichester.
12. Desvousges W.H., Frey J.H. Integrating focus groups and surveys: examples from environmental risk studies. J. Official Stat. 5:1989;349-363.
13. Desvousges W.H., Johnson F.R., Dunford R.W., Hudson S.P., Wilson K.N. Measuring natural resource damages with contingent valuation: tests of validity and reliability. Hausman J.A. Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. 1993;91-164 North Holland Press, Amsterdam.
14. Diamond P.A., Hausman J.A. Contingent valuation: is some number better than no number? J. Econ. Perspect. 8:1994;45-64.
15. Fischhoff B. Value elicitation: is there anything in there? Am. Psychol. 46:1991;835-847.
16. Fischhoff B., Furby L. Measuring values: a conceptual framework for interpreting transactions with special reference to contingent valuation of visibility. J. Risk Uncertainty. 1:1988;147-184.
17. Foster, J. (Ed.), 1997. Valuing Nature: Economics, Ethics and the Environment. Routledge, London, p. 273.
18. Garrod G.D., Willis K.G. Methodological issues in valuing the benefits of environmentally sensitive areas. J. Rural Stud. 15:1999;111-117.
19. Gregory R., Lichtenstein S., Slovic P. Valuing environmental resources: a constructivist approach. J. Risk Uncertainty. 7:1993;177-197.
20. Hanemann M.W. Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: how much can they differ? Am. Econ. Rev. 81:1991;635-647.
21. Hanemann W.M. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. J. Econ. Perspect. 8:1994;19-44.
22. Harrison C.M., Burgess J. Social constructions of nature: a case study of the conflicts over Rainham Marshes SSSI. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 19:1994;291-310.
23. Harrison C.M., Limb M., Burgess J. Nature in the city: popular values for a living world. J. Environ. Manag. 25:1987;347-362.
24. Harrison C.M., Burgess J., Clark J. Discounted knowledges: farmers and residents understandings of nature conservation goals and policies. J. Environ. Man. 54:1998;305-320.
25. Harrison C.M., Burgess J., Clark J. Capturing values for nature: ecological, economic and cultural perspectives. Holder J., McGillivray D. Locality and Identity: Environmental Issues in Law and Society. 1999;Dartmouth Press, London.
26. Hodge I., McNally S. Evaluating environmentally sensitive areas: the value of rural environments and policy relevance. J. Rural Stud. 14:1998;357-367.
27. Hutchinson W.G., Chilton S.M., Davis J. Measuring non-use value of environmental goods using the contingent valuation method: problems of information and cognition and the application of cognitive questionnaire design methods. J. Agric. Econ. 46:1995;97-112.
28. Jacobs M. Environmental valuation, deliberative democracy and public decision-making institutions. Foster J. Valuing Nature: Ethics, Economics and the Environment. 1997;211-231 Routledge, London.
29. Kahneman D., Knetsch J.L. Valuing public goods: the purchase of moral satisfaction. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 22:1992;57-70.
30. Keats R. Citizens, consumers and the environment. Environ. Values. 3:1994;333-350.
31. Keats R. Values and preferences in neo-classical environmental economics. Foster J. Valuing Nature: Economics, Ethics and the Environment. 1997;48-66 Routledge, London.
32. Krueger R.A. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 1994;255 Sage, London.
33. Mitchell R.C., Carson R.T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. 1989;463 Resources for the Future Inc, Washington, DC.
34. Morgan D.L. Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Quantitative Research Methods Series 16. 1988;85 Sage, London.
35. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1993. Natural resource damage assessments under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. Federal Register, 58:4601-4614.
36. Nyborg, K., 1999. Homo Economicus and Homo Politicus: interpretation and aggregation of environmental values. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. (in press).
37. Pearce D.W. Cost-benefit analysis and environmental policy. Oxf. Rev. Econ. Policy. 14:1998;84-100.
38. Pearce D.W., Markandya A., Barbier E. Blueprint for a Green Economy. 1989;224 Earthscan Publications, London.
39. Sagoff M. The Economy of the Earth Cambridge. 1988;271 Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
40. Sagoff M. Four dogmas of environmental economics. Environ. Values. 3:1994;285-310.
41. Schkade D.A., Payne J.W. How people respond to contingent valuation questions: a verbal protocol analysis of willingness to pay for an environmental regulation. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 26:1994;88-109.
42. Spash C.L., Hanley N. Preferences, information and biodiversity preservation. Ecol. Econ. 12:1995;191-208.
43. Vadnjal D., O'Connor M. What is the value of Rangitoto Island? Environ. Values. 3:1994;369-380.
44. Vatn A., Bromley D. Choices without process without apologies. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 26:1994;129-148.
45. Willis, K.G., Garrod, G.D., Benson, J.F., 1995. Wildlife enhancement scheme: A contingent valuation study of the Pevensey Levels. Unpublished report to English Nature Northminster House, Peterborough.
46. Willis K.G., Garrod G.D., Benson J.F., Carter M. Benefits and costs of the wildlife enhancement scheme: a case study of the Pevensey Levels. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 39:1996;387-401.
47. Woodhouse P. People as Informants. Thomas A., Chataway J., Wuyts M. Finding Out Fast. 1998;Sage Publications in association with the Open University, London.