Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Determining the Value of Non-Marketed Goods pp 299–321Cite as

Limits to the Applicability of the Contingent Valuation Approach?

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Studies in Risk and Uncertainty ((SIRU,volume 10))

Abstract

The Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) is a well-established device for assessing people’s preferences for public goods (see Carson et al. 1994). So far, technical refinements have been developed mainly in the area of questionnaire design. Closed-ended frames have gradually but steadily displaced open-ended ones. Furthermore, CVM has been applied to questions where it had been considered impossible to administer survey questionnaires.1 This concerns, above all, the problem of risky projects, where the content of the questions is highly complex.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Axelrod, Robert M. (1984), The Evolution of Cooperation, New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazaraa, Mokhtar S., and C.M. Shetty (1979), Nonlinear Programming: Theory and Algorithms, New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beed, Clive, and Owen Kane (1991), What is the Critique of the Mathematization of Economics? Kyklos 44, 581–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, Richard C., and Thomas A. Heberlein (1979), Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61, 926–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowker, J.M., and John R. Stoll (1988), Use of Dichotomous Choice Nonmarket Methods to Value the Whooping Crane Resource, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 70, 372–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brookshire, David S., and Thomas D. Crocker (1981), The Advantages of Contingent Valuation Methods for Benefit-Cost Analysis, Public Choice 36, 235–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, Trudy A. (1988), A New Paradigm for Valuing Non-market Goods Using Referendum Data: Maximum Likelihood Estimation by Censored Logistic Regression, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 15, 355–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, Trudy A., and Daniel D. Huppert (1991), Referendum Contingent Valuation Estimates: Sensitivity to the Assignment of Offered Values, Journal of the American Statistical Association 86, 910–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, Richard T., Jennifer Wright, Anna Alberini, Nancy Carson, and Nicholas Flores (1994), A Bibliography of Contingent Valuation Studies and Papers. Unpublished Paper, National Resource Damage Assessment Inc., La Jolla, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, Joseph, and John Loomis (1993), Sensitivity of Willingness-To-Pay Estimates to Bid Design in Dichotomous Choice Valuation Models: Reply, Land Economics 69, 203–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffield, Jhon W., and David A. Patterson (1991), Inference and Optimal Design for a Welfare Measure in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation, Land Economics 67, 225–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, Baruch (1994), What Do Psychologists Want? Contingent Valuation as a Special Case of Asking Questions. Paper presented at the Werner Reimers Stiftung, Bad Hamburg, July 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finney, D.J. (1955), Experimental Design and its Statistical Basis, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Georgescu-Roegen, Nicholas (1954), Choice, Expectations and Measurability, Quarterly Journal of Economics 68, 503–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Georgescu-Roegen, Nicholas (1971), The Entropy Law and the Economic Process, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldfeld, Stephen S., and Richard E. Quandt (1972), Nonlinear Methods in Econometrics, Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanemann, W. Michael (1984a), Discrete/Continuous Models of Consumer Demand, Econometrica 52, 541–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanemann, W. Michael (1984b), Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66, 332–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanemann, W. Michael (1989), Welfare Estimation in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Response Data: Reply, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71, 1057–1061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanemann, W. Michael, John Loomis and Barbara J. Kanninen (1991), Estimation Efficiency of Double Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73, 1255–1263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, Per-Olov., Bengt Kriström, and Kal Göran Mäler (1989), Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Response Data: Comment, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71, 1054–1056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky (1979), Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decisions under Risk, Econometrica 47, 263–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanninen, Barbara J. (1993a), Optimal Experimental Design for Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation, Land Economics 69, 138–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanninen, Bbatbara J. (1993b), Design of Sequential Experiments for Contingent Valuation Studies, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 25, S1–S11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanninen, Barbara J., and B. Kriström (1993), Sensitivity of Willingness-to-Pay Estimates to Bid Design in Dichotomous Choice Valuation Models: Comment, Land Economics 69, 199–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopp, Raymond A., and Katherine A. Pease (1994), Contingent Valuation: Economics, Law and Politics. Paper presented at the Werner Reimers Stiftung, Bad Hamburg, July 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kriström, Bengt (1990), A Non-Parametric Approach to the Estimation of Welfare Measures in Discrete Response Valuation Studies, Land Economics 66, 135–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunreuther, Howard, and Douglas Easterling (1990), Are Risk-Benefit Tradeoffs Possible in Siting Hazardous Facilities, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings 80, 252–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunreuther, Howard, Douglas Easterling, William Desvousges, and Paul Slovic (1990), Public Attitudes Toward Siting a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada, Risk Analysis 10, 469–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mäler, Karl Göran (1985), Welfare Economics and the Environment, in: A.V. Kneese and J.L. Sweeney (eds.), Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, vol. I, North Holland: Elsevier, 3–60.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McFadden, Daniel, and Gregory K. Leonard (1993), Issues in the Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods: Methodologies for Data Collection and Analysis, in: J.A. Hausman (ed.), Contingent Valuation. A Critical Assessment, North Holland: Elsevier, 165–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, Robert C., and Richard T. Carson (1986), Property Rights, Protest, and the Siting of Hazardous Waste Facilities, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings 76, 285–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, Robert C., and Richard T. Carson (1989), Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method? Washington: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • Opaluch, James J., Stephen K. Swallow, Thomas Weaver, Christopher W. Wessels, and Dennis Wichelns (1993), Evaluating Impacts from Noxious Facilities: Including Public Preferences in Current Siting Mechanisms. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 24, 41–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pommerehne, Werner W. (1982), Empirische Ansätze zur Erfassung der Präferenzen fir öffentliche Güter, in: Gottfried Bombach, Bernhard Gahlen, and Alfred E. Ott (eds.), Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Staatstätigkeit, Tübingen: Mohr, 407–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pommerehne, Werner W. (1987), Präferenzen für öffentliche Güter, Tübingen: Mohr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pommerehne, Werner W., and Albert Hart (1994), Tragic Choices and Collective Decision-Making, Discussion Paper B 9401, University of Saarland, Saarbrücken.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pommerehne, Werner W., and Anselm U. Römer (1992), Ansätze zur Erfassung der Präferenzen für öffentliche Güter: Ein Überblick, Jahrbuch für Sozialwissenschaft 43, 171–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schkade, David A., and John W. Payne (1993), Where Do the Numbers Come from? How People Respond to Contingent Valuation Questions, in: J.A. Hausman (ed.), Contingent Valuation. A Critical Assessment,North Holland: Elsevier, 271–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V. Kerry, and William H. Desvousges (1987), An Empirical Analysis of the Economic Value of Risk Changes, Journal of Political Economy 95, 89–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Werner W. Pommerehne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Albert Hart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Resources for the Future, USA

    R. J. Kopp

  2. University of Saarland, Germany

    W. W. Pommerehne

  3. University of Michigan, USA

    N. Schwarz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pommerehne, W.W., Hart, A. (1997). Limits to the Applicability of the Contingent Valuation Approach?. In: Kopp, R.J., Pommerehne, W.W., Schwarz, N. (eds) Determining the Value of Non-Marketed Goods. Studies in Risk and Uncertainty, vol 10. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5364-5_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5364-5_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6255-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-011-5364-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation