Abstract
A difference between a hypothetical and a real willingness to pay (WTP) may be due to several different sources of bias. One such source which has made many economists distrust the contingent valuation method (CVM) is hypothetical bias.2 Rowe et al. (1980) defined this bias as follows:
Amounts to the potential error due to not confronting any individual with a real situation. Asking somebody what they will do a priori is not the same as confronting them with a set of well defined prices over events and making them pay for them.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Blackburn, M., Harrison, G.W. and Rutström, E.E. (1994) Statistical bias functions and informative hypothetical surveys, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76 (5), 1084–1088.
Braden, J.B. and Kolstad, C.D. (1991) Measuring the Demand for Environmental Quality, Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam.
Cropper, M.L. and Oates, W.E., Environmental economics: A survey, Journal of Economic Literature XXX, 675–740.
Cummings, R.G. and Harrison, G.W. (1994) Was the Ohio Court well informed in their assessment of the accuracy of the contingent valuation?, Natural Resources Journal 34 (1), 1–36.
Cummings, R.G., Harrison, G.W. and Rutström, E.E. (1995) Homegrown values and hypothetical surveys: Is the dichotomous choice approach incentive compatible?, American Economic Review 85, 260–266.
Davis, D.D. and Holt, C.A. (1993) Experimental Economics, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Harrison, G.W., Beekman, R.L., Brown, L.B., Clements, L.A., McDaniel, T.M., Odom, S.L. and Williams, M.B. (1999) Environmental damage assessment with hypothetical surveys: The calibration approach, in M. Boman, R. Brännlund and B. Kriström, Topics in Environmental Economics, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (this volume).
Mitchell, R.C. and Carson, R.T. (1989) Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, MD.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (1993) Report of the NOAA Panel on contingent valuation, Federal Register 58 (10), 4602–4614.
Rowe, R.D., D’Arge, R.C. and Brookshire, D.S. (1980) An experiment on the economic value of visibility, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 7 (1), 1–19.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1999 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Frykblom, P. (1999). Statistical Bias Functions: The Alchemy of Contingent Valuation?. In: Boman, M., Brännlund, R., Kriström, B. (eds) Topics in Environmental Economics. Economy & Environment, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3544-5_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3544-5_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5297-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-3544-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive