Learning design contingent valuation (LDCV): NOAA guidelines, preference learning and coherent arbitrariness

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

Volumn 55, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 127-141

  Bateman, Ian J ^a   Burgess, Diane ^b   Hutchinson, W George ^c   Matthews, David I ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^b AGRI FOOD AND BIOSCIENCES INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^c QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Animal welfare; Coherent arbitrariness; Contingent valuation; Learning; NOAA guidelines; Non market goods; Preferences; Similarity; Willingness to pay (WTP)

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; MARKETING; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

ANIMAL WELFARE; COHERENT ARBITRARINESS; CONTINGENT VALUATION; LEARNING; NON MARKET GOODS; PREFERENCES;

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT;

ANIMAL WELFARE; CONTINGENT VALUATION; DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; GUIDELINE; LEARNING; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 39149109297     PISSN: 00950696     EISSN: 10960449     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2007.08.003     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Alberini A., Kanninen B., and Carson R.T. Modelling response incentive effects in dichotomous choice contingent valuation data. Land Econ. 73 (1997) 309-324
2. Ariely D., Loewenstein G., and Prelec D. 'Coherent arbitrariness': stable demand curves without stable preferences. Q. J. Econ. 118 1 (2003) 73-105
3. Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P.R., Leamer E.E., Radner R., and Schuman H. Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Fed. Reg. 58 (1993) 4601-4614
4. Bateman I.J., Langford I.H., Turner R.K., Willis K.G., and Garrod G.D. Elicitation and truncation effects in contingent valuation studies. Ecol. Econ. 12 2 (1995) 161-179
5. Bateman I.J., Munro A., Rhodes B., Starmer C., and Sugden R. A test of the theory of reference-dependent preferences. Q. J. Econ. 112 2 (1997) 479-505
6. Bateman I.J., Langford I.H., Jones A.P., and Kerr G.N. Bound and path effects in multiple-bound dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Resour. Energy Econ. 23 3 (2001) 191-213
7. Bateman I.J., Carson R.T., Day B., Hanemann W.M., Hanley N., Hett T., Jones-Lee M., Loomes G., Mourato S., Özdemiroǧlu E., Pearce D.W., Sugden R., and Swanson J. Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual (2002), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK
8. Bateman I.J., Cole M., Cooper P., Georgiou S., Hadley D., and Poe G.L. On visible choice sets and scope sensitivity. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 47 (2004) 71-93
9. Boyle K.J., and Bishop R.C. Welfare measurements using contingent valuation: a comparison of techniques. J. Am. Agric. Assoc. (1988) 20-28
10. Braga J., and Starmer C. Preference anomalies, preference elicitation and the discovered preference hypothesis. Environ. Resour. Econ. 32 1 (2005) 55-89
11. D.E. Burgess, Determining society's values for programmes to improve the welfare of farm animals in the UK, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Queens University Belfast, 2001.
12. Burton A.C., Carson K.S., Chilton S.M., and Hutchinson W.G. Resolving questions about bias in real and hypothetical referenda. Environ. Resour. Econ. 38 4 (2007) 513-516
13. Cameron T.A., and Quiggin J. Estimation using contingent valuation data from a 'dichotomous choice with follow-up' questionnaire. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 27 (1994) 218-234
14. Carson R.T. Contingent Valuation: A Comprehensive Bibliography and History (2007), Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA
15. Carson R.T., and Groves T. Incentive and informational properties of preference questions. Environ. Resour. Econ. 37 1 (2007) 181-210
16. Carson R.T., Flores N.E., and Hanemann W.M. Sequencing and valuing public goods. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 36 (1998) 314-323
17. Carson R.T., Mitchell R.C., Hanemann W.M., Kopp R.J., Presser S., and Ruud P.A. Contingent valuation and lost passive use: damages from the Exxon Valdez. Environ. Resour. Econ. 25 3 (2003) 257-286
18. Cooper J., Hanemann W.M., and Signorello G. One-and-one-half-bound dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Rev. Econ. Stat. 84 4 (2002) 742-750
19. Cox J.C., and Grether D.M. The preference reversal phenomenon: response mode, markets and incentives. Econ. Theory 7 (1996) 381-405
20. Cummings R.G., Elliott S., Harrison G.W., and Murphy J. Are hypothetical referenda incentive compatible?. J. Polit. Econ. 105 3 (1997) 609-621
21. DeShazo J.R. Designing transactions without framing effects in iterative question formats. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 43 (2002) 360-385
22. DeShazo J.R., and German F. Designing choice sets for stated preference methods: the effects of complexity on choice consistency. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 44 1 (2002) 123-143
23. Efron B., and Tibshirani R.J. An Introduction to the Bootstrap (1993), Chapman & Hall, London
24. Fehr E., and Tyran J.-R. Individual irrationality and aggregate outcomes. J. Econ. Perspect. 19 4 (2005) 43-66
25. Gibbard A. Manipulation of voting schemes: a general result. Econometrica 41 (1973) 587-601
26. Green D., Jacowitz K.E., Kahneman D., and McFadden D. Referendum contingent valuation, anchoring, and willingness to pay for public goods. Resour. Energy Econ. 20 2 (1998) 85-116
27. Hanemann W.M., and Kanninen B. The statistical analysis of discrete-response CV data. In: Bateman I.J., and Willis K.G. (Eds). Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the US, EU, and Developing Countries (1999), Oxford University Press, Oxford 302-441
28. Hanemann M., Loomis J., and Kanninen B. Statistical efficiency of double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 73 (1991) 1255-1263
29. Herriges J.A., and Shogren J.F. Starting point bias in dichotomous choice valuation with follow-up questioning. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 30 1 (1996) 112-131
30. Hu W., Adamowicz L.W., and Veeman M.M. Labeling context and reference point effects in models of food attribute demand. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 88 4 (2006) 1034-1049
31. Kahneman D., Slovic P., and Tversky A. Judgement Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (1982), Cambridge University Press, New York
32. Knetsch J.L., Tang F.-F., and Thaler R.H. The endowment effect and repeated market trials: is the Vickrey auction demand revealing?. Exp. Econ. 4 3 (2001) 257-269
33. List J.A. Does market experience eliminate market anomalies?. Q. J. Econ. (2003) 41-72
34. Loomis J., Brown T., Lucero B., and Peterson G. Evaluating the validity of the dichotomous choice question format in contingent valuation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 10 (1997) 109-123
35. Lusk J.L., Feldkamp T., and Schroeder T.C. Experimental auction procedure: impact on valuation of quality differentiated goods. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 86 2 (2004) 389-405
36. D.I. Matthews, C.A. Glass, W.G. Hutchinson, Use of the bivariate probit in the joint estimation of willingness to pay for several animal welfare improvements, in: Proceedings of the Agricultural Economics Society Annual Conference, University of Plymouth, 2003.
37. McFadden D. Contingent valuation and social choice. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 76 (1994) 689-708
38. Plott C.R., and Zeiler K. The willingness to pay-willingness to accept gap, the 'endowment effect,' subject misconceptions, and experimental procedures for eliciting valuations. Am. Econ. Rev. 95 3 (2005) 530-545
39. C.R. Plott, Rational individual behavior in markets and social choice processes: the discovered preference hypothesis, in: K. Arrow, E. Colombatto, M. Perleman, C. Schmidt (Eds.), Rational Foundations of Economic Behavior, 1996, Macmillan, London, St. Martin's, New York, pp. 225-250.
40. Rubinstein A. Similarity and decision-making under risk. J. Econ. Theory 46 (1988) 145-153
41. Satterthwaite M.A. Strategy-proofness and arrow's conditions: existence and correspondence theorems of voting procedures and social welfare functions. J. Econ. Theory 10 (1975) 187-217
42. Schkade D.A., and Kahneman D. Does living in California make people happy? A focusing illusion in judgments of life satisfaction. Psychol. Sci. 9 (1998) 340-346
43. Taylor L.O., McKee M., Laury S.K., and Cummings R.G. Induced value tests of the referendum voting mechanism. Econ. Lett. 71 1 (2001) 61-66
44. Tversky A. Features of similarity. Psychol. Rev. 84 (1977) 327-352
45. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185 (1974) 1124-1131
46. H. Varian, Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach, fifth ed., 1999, Norton, New York.