Contingent valuation and collective choice

Kyklos

Volumn 59, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 115-135

  Schläpfer, Felix ^a   Hanley, Nick ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTINGENT VALUATION; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

CENTRAL EUROPE; EURASIA; EUROPE; SWITZERLAND; ZURICH [SWITZERLAND];

EID: 33646681641     PISSN: 00235962     EISSN: 14676435     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6435.2006.00323.x     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Arrow, Kenneth R., Robert Solow, Paul R. Portney, Edward E. Leamer, Roy Radner and Howard Schuman (1993). Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation, Federal Register. 58: 4602-4614.
2. Barlow, Robin (1970). Efficiency Aspects of Local School Expenditures, Journal of Political Economy. 78: 1028-1040.
3. Bergstrom, Theodore C. and Robert P. Goodman (1973). Private Demand for Public Goods, American Economic Review. 63: 280-296.
4. Boyle, Kevin J., William H. Desvousges, F. Reed Johnson, Richard W. Dunford and Sara P. Hudson (1994). An Investigation of Part-Whole Biases in Contingent-Valuation Studies, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 27: 64-83.
5. Borcherding, Thomas E. and Robert T. Deacon (1972). The Demand for the Services of Non-federal Governments, American Economic Review. 62: 891-901.
6. Brookshire, David S., Mark A. Thayer, William D. Schulze and Ralph C. d'Arge (1982). Valuing Public-Goods -a Comparison of Survey and Hedonic Approaches, American Economic Review. 72: 165-177.
7. Canton of Zurich (1997). Steuergesetz. Zurich, Switzerland: Cantonal Printing Office.
8. Carson, Richard T. (2000). Contingent Valuation: A User's Guide, Environmental Science and Technology. 34: 1413-1418.
9. Carson, Richard T., W. Michael Hanemann and Robert C. Mitchell (1986). The Use of Simulated Political Markets to Value Public Goods. Working Paper, Economics Department, University of California, San Diego
10. Champ, Patricia A. and Thomas C. Brown (1997). A Comparison of Contingent and Actual Voting Behavior. Proceedings from the W-133 Benefits and Cost Transfer in Natural Resource Planning, 10 th Interim Report, Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service.
11. Cummings, Ronald G. and Laura O. Taylor (1999). Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method, American Economic Review. 89: 649-665.
12. Deacon, Robert and Perry Shapiro (1975). Private Preference for Collective Goods Revealed through Voting on Referenda, American Economic Review. 64: 943-955.
13. Diamond, Paul A. and Jerry A. Hausman (1994). Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better Than no Number?, Journal of Economic Perspectives. 8: 45-64.
14. Eichenberger, R. and Felix Oberholzer-Gee (1998). Rational Moralists: The Role of Fairness in Democratic Economic Politics, Public Choice. 94: 191-210.
15. Executive Council (1996). Änderung des Gesetzes über die Finanzierung von Massnahmen für den Natur- und Heimatschutz und für Erholungsgebiete. Beleuchtender Bericht des Regierungsrates. Kantonale Volksabstimmung, Issue Abstimmungsvorlagen Kanton Zürich 22. September 1996, (Aug.): 4-5.
16. Federal Executive Council (2000). Verordnung über das Bundesinventar der schützenswerten Ortsbilder der Schweiz. Bern, Switzerland.
17. Frey, Bruno S. (1994). Direct Democracy -Politicoeconomic Lessons from Swiss Experience, American Economic Review. 84: 338-342.
18. Frey, RenéL. (1970). An Economic Interpretation of Voting Behaviour on Public Finance Issues, Kyklos. 23: 792-805.
19. Green, Donald, Karen E. Jacowitz, Daniel Kahneman and Daniel McFadden (1998). Referendum Contingent Valuation, Anchoring, and Willingness to Pay for Public Goods, Resource and Energy Economics. 20: 85-116.
20. Hanemann, W. Michael (1994). Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation, Journal of Economic Perspectives. 8: 19-43.
21. Kahneman, Daniel and John L. Knetsch (1992). Valuing Public Goods: The Purchase of Moral Satisfaction, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 22: 57-70.
22. List, John A., Robert P. Berrens, Alok K. Bohara and Joe Kerkvliet (2004). Examining the Role of Social Isolation on Stated Preferences, American Economic Review. 94: 741-752.
23. Lupia, Arthur and John G. Matsusaka (2004). Direct Democracy: New Approaches to Old Questions, Annual Review of Political Science. 7: 463-482.
24. Lupia, Arthur and Mathew D. McCubbins (1998). The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know? New York: Cambridge University Press.
25. McFadden, Daniel (1994). Contingent Valuation and Social Choice, American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 76: 689-708.
26. McFadden, Daniel (2001). Economic Choices, American Economic Review. 91: 351-378.
27. Mitchell, Robert C. and Richard T. Carson (1989). Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Continent Valuation Method. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
28. NZZ (various editions). Neue Zürcher Zeitung. Zurich, Switzerland: Verlag Neue Zürcher Zeitung.
29. Office of Nature Conservation (2000). Inventar der überkommunalen Naturschutzgebiete. Zurich, Switzerland: Office of Nature Conservation, Canton of Zurich.
30. Office of the Parliament (1993). Beschluss über die Festsetzung des Steuersatzes für die Jahre 1994-1997, Offizielle Sammlung (OS Kanton Zürich). 52: 577.
31. Office of the Parliament (1996). Beschluss des Büros des Kantonsrates über die Ergebnisse der kantonalen Volksabstimmung vom 22. September 1996, Zürcher Amtsblatt. (1996): 1641-1668.
32. Portney, Paul R. (1994). The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care, Journal of Economic Perspectives. 8: 3-17.
33. Roschewitz, A. (1999). Der monetäre Wert der Kulturlandschaft. Eine Contingent Valuation Studie. Kiel, Germany: Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk.
34. Schäpfer, Felix (2006). Survey Protocol and Income Effects in the Contingent Valuation of Public Goods: A Meta-Analysis, Ecological Economics. In press.
35. Schläpfer, Felix, Robert T. Deacon and Nick Hanley (2005). A Note on the Measurement of Bias in Stated Willingness to Pay for Public Goods, Kyklos. 58: 145-152.
36. Schläpfer, Felix and Nick Hanley (2003). Do Landscape Patterns Affect the Demand for Landscape Amenities Protection?, Journal of Agricultural Economics. 54: 21-35.
37. Schläpfer, Felix, Anna Roschewitz and Nick Hanley (2004). Validation of Stated Preferences for Public Goods: A Comparison of Contingent Valuation Survey Response and Voting Behaviour, Ecological Economics. 51: 1-16.
38. Shapiro, Perry and Robert T. Deacon (1996). Estimating the Demand for Public Goods: Comments and Extensions, in: David J. Bjornstad and James R. Kahn (eds.), The Contingent Valuation of Environmental Resources. Methodological Issues and Research Needs. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar: 244-262.
39. Smith, T. R. and Perry Shapiro (1979). On the Spatial Equity of the California Sales Tax: Estimates of Imbalances in Tax Dollar Flows, Economic Geography. 55: 135-146.
40. Vossler, Christian A. and Joe Kerkvliet (2003). A Criterion Validity Test of the Contingent Valuation Method: Comparing Hypothetical and Actual Voting Behavior for a Public Good, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 45: 631-649.
41. Vossler, Christian A., Joe Kerkvliet, Steven Polasky and Olesya Gainutdinova (2003). Externally Validating Contingent Valuation: An Open-space Survey and Referendum in Corvallis, Oregon, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 51: 261-277.