Testing the consistency between standard contingent valuation, repeated contingent valuation and choice experiments

Journal of Agricultural Economics

Volumn 60, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 154-170

  Christie, Mike ^a   Azevedo, Christopher ^b  

^a ABERYSTWYTH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL MISSOURI   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice experiments; Contingent valuation; Convergent validity; Repeated contingent valuation; Revealed preference; Stated preference; Water quality

Indexed keywords

CONTINGENT VALUATION; ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES; MODELING; WATER QUALITY;

CLEAR LAKE [IOWA]; IOWA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 58149523204     PISSN: 0021857X     EISSN: 14779552     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1477-9552.2008.00178.x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Adamowicz, W., Boxall, M., Williams, M. and Louviere, J. J. 'Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: Choice experiments and contingent valuation', American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 80, (1998) pp. 64-75.
2. Arrow, K. J., Solow, R., Portney, P., Leamer, E., Radner, R. and Shuman, H. 'Report of NOAA panel on contingent valuation', Federal Registration, Vol. 58, (1993) pp. 4016-4614.
3. Blamey, R., Gordon, J. and Chapman, R. 'Choice modeling: Assessing the environmental values of water supply options', Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Vol. 43, (1999) pp. 337-357.
4. Boxall, P. W., Adamowicz, W., Williams, M., Swait, J. and Louviere, J. J. 'A comparison of stated preference approaches to the measurement of environmental values', Ecological Economics, Vol. 18, (1996) pp. 243-253.
5. Cameron, T. 'Combining contingent valuation and travel cost data for the valuation of nonmarket goods', Land Economics, Vol. 68, (1992) pp. 302-317.
6. Carlsson, F. and Martinsson, P. 'Do hypothetical and actual marginal willingness to pay differ in choice experiments? Application to the valuation of the environment', Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 41, (2001) pp. 179-192.
7. Carson, R. T., Flores, N. E., Martin, K. E. and Wright, J. L. 'Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: Comparing the estimates for quasi-public goods', Land Economics, February, (1996) pp. 80-99.
8. Christie, M. 'A comparison of alternative contingent valuation elicitation treatments for the evaluation of complex environmental policy', Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 62, (2001) pp. 255-269.
9. Colombo, S., Calatrava-Requeno, J. and Hanley, N. 'Analysing the social benefits of soil conservation measures using stated preference methods', Ecological Economics, Vol. 58, (2006) pp. 850-861.
10. Crooker, J. R. and Herriges, J. A. 'Parametric and semi-nonparametric estimation of willingness-to-pay in the dichotomous choice contingent valuation framework', Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol. 27, (2004) pp. 451-480.
11. Diamond, P. A., Hausman, J., Leonard, G. K. and Denning, M. A. 'Does contingent valuation measure preferences? Experimental evidence', in J. A. Hausman (ed.), Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment (New York: North-Holland, 1993, pp. 41-62).
12. Dillman, D. A. Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method (Chichester: Wiley-Interscience Publications, 1978).
13. Freedman, D. A. and Peters, S. C. 'Bootstrapping a regression equation: Some empirical results', Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 79, (1984) pp. 97-106.
14. Hanemann, W. M. 'Welfare evaluation in contingent valuation experiments with discrete choice responses', American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 66, (1984) pp. 332-341.
15. Hanemann, W. M. 'Valuing the environment through contingent valuation', Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 8, (1994) pp. 19-43.
16. Hanley, N., Macmillan, D., Wright, R., Bullock, C., Simpson, I., Parrsisson, D. and Crabtree, R. 'Contingent valuation versus choice experiments: Estimating the benefits of environmentally sensitive areas in Scotland', Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 49, (1998) pp. 1-15.
17. HM Treasury. The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government (London: HM Treasury, 2003).
18. Kling, C. L. and Sexton, R. J. 'Bootstrapping in applied welfare analysis', American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 72, (1990) pp. 406-418.
19. Krinsky, I. and Robb, A. L. 'On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities', Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 68, (1986) pp. 715-719.
20. Krinsky, I. and Robb, A. L. 'On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities: A correction', Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 72, (1990) pp. 189-190.
21. Louviere, J. J., Hensher, D. A. and Swait, J. D. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).
22. Madden, P. 'A generalization of Hicksian q substitutes and complements with application to demand rationing', Econometrica, Vol. 59, (1991) pp. 1497-1508.
23. Mitchell, R. C. and Carson, R. T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method (Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 1989).
24. Mogas, J., Riera, P. and Bennett, J. 'Accounting for afforestation externalities: A comparison of contingent valuation and choice modelling', European Environment, Vol. 15, (2005) pp. 44-58.
25. Poe, G. L., Serenace-Lossin, E. K. and Welsh, M. P. 'Measuring the difference (X -Y) of simulated distributions: A convolutions approach', American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 76, (1994) pp. 904-915.
26. Poe, G. L., Welsh, M. and Champ, P. 'Measuring the difference in mean willingness to pay when dichotomous choice contingent valuation responses are not independent', Land Economics, Vol. 73, (1997) pp. 255-267.
27. Swait, J. and Louviere, J. 'The role of the scale parameter in the estimation and comparison of multinomial logit models', Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 30, (1993) pp. 305-314.