Models for sample selection bias in contingent valuation: Application to forest biodiversity

Journal of Forest Economics

Volumn 15, Issue 1-2, 2009, Pages 59-78

  Garcia, Serge ^a,b   Harou, Patrice ^a,c   Montagné, Claire ^a,b   Stenger, Anne ^a,b  

^a AGROPARISTECH   (France)

^b CEMAGREF   (France)

^c Pinchot Institute   (United States)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation; Double selection; Forest biodiversity; Forest recreation; Sample selection bias

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; ECONOMICS; SURVEYS;

CONTINGENT VALUATIONS; DOUBLE SELECTION; FOREST BIODIVERSITY; FOREST RECREATION; SAMPLE SELECTION BIAS;

FORESTRY;

BIODIVERSITY; CONTINGENT VALUATION; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; FORESTRY; RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EURASIA; EUROPE; FRANCE; WESTERN EUROPE;

EID: 57749187829     PISSN: 11046899     EISSN: 16181530     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfe.2008.03.008     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Bateman I.J., Carson R.T., Day B., Hanemann M., Hanley N., Hett T., Jones-lee M., Loomes G., Mourato S., Özdemiroglu E., Pearce D.W., Sugden R., and Swanson J. Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual (2002), Edward Elgar Publishing, Northampton, MA, USA
2. Carson R.T., and Groves T. Incentive and informational properties of preference questions. Environmental and Resource Economics 37 1 (2007) 181-210
3. Champ P.A., and Bishop R.C. Is willingness to pay for a public good sensitive to the elicitation format?. Land Economics 82 2 (2006) 162-173
4. Eklöf, J.A., Karlsson, S., 1997. Testing and correcting for sample selection bias in discrete choice contingent valuation studies. In: SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance, No 171, Revised in 1999, Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden.
5. Fishe R.P.H., Trost R.P., and Lurie P.M. Labor force earnings and college choice of young women: an examination of selectivity bias and comparative advantage. Economics of Education Review 1 2 (1981) 169-191
6. Garcia, S., Harou, P., Montagné, C., Stenger, A., 2007. Valuing forest biodiversity from a national survey in France: a dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Cahier du LEF no 2007-08, 〈http://lef.nancy-engref.inra.fr/Docs/doc_LEF_n2007-08.pdf〉.
7. Green D., Jacowitz K.E., Kahneman D., and McFadden D. Referendum contingent valuation, anchoring, and willingness to pay for public goods. Resource and Energy Economics 20 2 (1998) 85-116
8. Ham J.C. Estimation of a labour supply model with censoring due to unemployment and underemployment. Review of Economic Studies 49 3 (1982) 335-354
9. Heckman J.J. The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection, and limited dependant variables and a simple estimator for such models. The Annals of Economic and Social Measurement 5 (1976) 475-492
10. Heckman J.J. Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica 47 1 (1979) 153-161
11. Herriges J.A., and Shogren J.F. Starting point bias in dichotomous choice valuation with follow-up questioning. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30 1 (1996) 112-131
12. Köhlin G. Contingent valuation in project planning and evaluation: the case of social forestry in Orissa, India. Environment and Development Economics 6 2 (2001) 237-258
13. Lee L.-F., Maddala G.S., and Trost R.P. Asymptotic covariance matrices of two-stage probit and two-stage tobit methods for simultaneous equations models with selectivity. Econometrica 48 2 (1980) 491-503
14. Peyron, J.-L., Harou, P., Niedzwiedz, A., Stenger, A., 2002. National survey on demand for recreation in French forests. Report for EUROSTAT, Nancy, France, 44pp.
15. Poirier D.J. Partial observability in bivariate probit models. Journal of Econometrics 12 2 (1980) 209-217
16. Strazzera E., Genius M., Scarpa R., and Hutchinson G. The effect of protest votes on the estimates of WTP for use values of recreational sites. Environmental and Resource Economics 25 4 (2003) 461-476
17. Strazzera E., Scarpa R., Calia P., Garrod G., and Willis K. Modelling zero bids in contingent valuation surveys. Applied Economics 35 2 (2003) 133-138
18. Tunali I. A general structure for models of double-selection and an application to a joint migration/earnings process with remigration. In: Erhenberg R.G. (Ed). Research in Labor Economics vol. 8, Part B (1986), JAI Press Inc., Greenwish 235-283
19. van de Ven W.P.M.M., and van Praag B.M.S. The demand for deductibles in private health insurance: a probit model with sample selection. Journal of Econometrics 17 2 (1981) 229-252
20. Whitehead J.C., Groothuis P.A., and Blomquist G.C. Testing for non-response and sample selection bias in contingent valuation: analysis of a combination phone/mail survey. Economics Letters 41 2 (1993) 215-220
21. Yoo S.-H., and Yang H.-J. Application of sample selection model to double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation studies. Environmental and Resource Economics 20 2 (2001) 147-163