Ex ante and ex post valuations of a cultural good. Are preferences or expectations changing?

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 127-140

  Bedate, Ana María ^a   Herrero, Luis César ^a   Sanz, José Ángel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VALLADOLID   (Spain)

Author keywords

contingent valuation; dynamic analysis; museum economics; willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

ART; BOOTSTRAPPING; CONTINGENT VALUATION; DYNAMIC ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ESTIMATION METHOD; MUSEUM; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 84855421431     PISSN: 09640568     EISSN: 13600559     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2011.583079     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Alberini A. Kahn J.R Handbook on contingent valuation Edward Elgar Cheltenham 2006
2. Alberini, A., Kanninen, B. and Carson, R. 1997. Modelling response incentive effects in dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Land economics, 73(3): 309-324.
3. An, M. Y. 2000. A semiparametric distribution for willingness to pay and statistical inference with dichotomous choice contingent valuation data. American journal of agricultural economics, 82(3): 487-500.
4. An, M. Y. and Ayala, R. A. 1996. "A simple algorithm for nonparametric estimation of distribution functions with arbitrarily grouped data". In Working Paper 9602, Department of Economics, Durham: Duke University.
5. Arrow, K. L. 1993. Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation Federal Register 58, 4 601-4 614
6. Ayer, M. 1955. An empirical distribution function for sampling with incomplete information. Annals of mathematical statistics, 26: 641-647.
7. Baez, A., Niklitschek, M. and Herrero, L. C. 2009. The valuation of historical sites: a case study of Valdivia, Chile. Journal of environmental planning and management, 52(1): 97-109.
8. Bateman, I. J. 2002. Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: a manual, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
9. Berrens, R. P., Bohara, A. K. and Kerkvliet, J. 2000. Contingent values for New Mexico in stream flows: with test of scope, group-size reminder, and temporal reliability. Journal of environmental economics and management, 58(1): 73-90.
10. Carson, R. T. and Mitchell, R. C. 1993. The value of clean water: the public's willingness to pay for boatable, fishable and swimmable quality water. Water resources research, 29(7): 2445-2454.
11. Carson, R. T., Flores, N. E. and Meade, N. F. 2001. Contingent valuation: controversies and evidence. Environmental and resource economics, 19(2): 173-210.
12. Carson, R. T. 2003. A contingent valuation and lost passive use: damages from Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environmental and resource economics, 25(3): 257-286.
13. Carson, R. T. 1997. Temporal reliability of estimates from contingent valuation. Land economics, 73(2): 151-163.
14. Cuccia, T. and Signorello, G. 2002. "Methods for measuring the demand for the arts and heritage: theoretical issues". In The economics of heritage: a study in the political economy of culture in Sicily, Edited by: Rizzo, I. and Towse, R. 119-146. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
15. Del Saz, S. and Montagud, J. 2005. Valuing cultural heritage: the social benefits of restoring an old Arab tower. Journal of cultural heritage, 6(1): 69-77.
16. Downing, M. Y. and Ozuna, T. J. 1996. Testing the reliability of the benefit function transfer approach. Journal of environmental economics and management, 30(2): 316-322.
17. Dziegielewska, D. A. and Mendelsohn, R. 2007. Does 'No' mean 'No'. A protest methodology. Environmental and resource economics, 38(1): 71-87.
18. Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R. 1998. An introduction to the bootstrap, Washington DC: Chapman & Hall /CRC.
19. EFTEC. 2005. Valuation of the historic environment, Report prepared for English Heritage, London: The Heritage Lottery Fund, DCMS and the Department of Transport.
20. Haab, T. C. and McConnell, K. E. 2002. Valuing environmental and natural resources. The econometrics of non-market valuation, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
21. Hanemann, W. M. 1985. Some issues in continuous - and discrete - response contingent valuation studies. Northeastern journal of agricultural and resources economics, 14(1): 5-13.
22. Hanemann, W. M., Loomis, J. and Kanninen, B. 1991. Statistical efficiency of double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation. American journal of agricultural economics, 73(4): 1255-1263.
23. Hausman J.A Contingent valuation. A critical assessment North-Holland Amsterdam 1993
24. Jakus, P. M., Stephens, B. and Fly, M. 2006. "Temporal reliability in contingent valuation (with a restrictive research budget)". In Handbook on contingent valuation, Edited by: Alberini, A. and Kahn, J. R. 249-262. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
25. Jorgensen, B. S. 1999. Protest responses in contingent valuation. Environmental and resource economics, 14(1): 131-150.
26. Kaplan, E. L. and Meier, P. 1958. Nonparametric estimation for incomplete observations. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 53: 457-481.
27. Loomis, J. B. 1989. Test-retest reliability of the contingent valuation method: a comparison ofgeneral population and visitor responses. American journal of agricultural economics, 71(1): 76-84.
28. Loomis, J. B. 1990. Comparative reliability of the dichotomous choice and open-ended contingent valuation techniques. Journal of environmental economics and management, 18(1): 78-85.
29. McConnell, K. E., Strand, I. E. and Valdes, S. 1998. Testing temporal reliability and carry-over effect: the role of correlated responses in test-retest reliability studies. Environmental and resource economics, 12(3): 357-374.
30. Mitchell, R. C. and Carson, R. T. 1989. Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method, Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
31. Navrud S. Ready R.C Valuing cultural heritage. Applying environmental valuation techniques to historic buildings, monuments and artefacts Edward Elgar Cheltenham 2002
32. Noonan, D. 2003. Contingent valuation and cultural resources: a meta-analytic review of the literature. Journal of cultural economics, 27(3-4): 159-176.
33. Portney, P. R. 1994. The contingent valuation debate: why economists should care. Journal of economic perspectives, 8(4): 3-18.
34. Reiling, S. D. 1990. Temporal reliability of contingent values. Land economics, 66(2): 128-134.
35. Riganti, P. and Willis, K. G. 2002. "Component and temporal value reliability in cultural goods: the case of Roman Imperial remains near Naples". In Valuing cultural heritage. Applying environmental valuation techniques to historic buildings, monuments and artefacts, Edited by: Navrud, S. and Ready, R. C. 142-158. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
36. Sanz, J. A. 2004. Valoración económica del patrimonio cultural, Gijón, Spain: Trea.
37. Sanz, J. A., Herrero, L. C. and Bedate, A. M. 2003. Contingent valuation and semiparametric methods: a case study of the National Museum of Sculpture in Valladolid, Spain. Journal of cultural economics, 27(3-4): 241-257.
38. Strazzera, E. 2003. The effect of protest votes on the estimates of WTP for use values of recreational sites. Environmental and resource economics, 25(4): 461-476.
39. Teisl, M. F. 1995. Test-retest reliability of contingent valuation with independent sample pretest and posttest control group. American journal of agricultural economics, 77(3): 613-619.
40. Turnbull, B. 1974. Nonparametric estimation of a survivorship function with doubly censored data. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 6: 169-173.
41. Turnbull, B. 1976. The empirical distribution function with arbitrarily grouped, censored and truncated data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 38(3): 290-295.
42. Whitehead, J. C. and Aiken, R. 2007. Temporal reliability of willingness to pay from the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. Applied economics, 39(6): 777-786.
43. Whitehead, J. C. and Hoban, T. J. 1999. Testing for temporal reliability in contingent valuation with time for changes in factors affecting demand. Land economics, 75(3): 453-465.
44. Whitehead, J. C., Groothuis, P. A. and Blomquist, G. C. 1993. Testing for non-response and sample selection bias in contingent valuation: analysis of a combination phone/mail survey. Economic letters, 41(2): 215-220.