IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/canjag/v67y2019i2p171-192.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transfers of landowner willingness to accept: A convergent validity and reliability test using choice experiments in two Canadian watersheds

Author

Listed:
  • Ryan Trenholm
  • Van Lantz
  • Wolfgang Haider
  • Duncan Knowler

Abstract

We examined the reliability and validity of transferring estimates of marginal willingness to accept and compensating surplus. In doing so, we used data from two case studies applying choice experiments to elicit landowner preferences for incentive‐based wetland conservation programs in two adjacent watersheds in Southern Ontario, Canada (Grand and Upper Thames Rivers in parallel in 2013). The choice experiment data were modeled in willingness to accept space using a generalized multinomial logit. Transfer reliability was investigated by calculating transfer errors, while validity was investigated by testing the equality of utility functions as well as by assessing the similarity of welfare estimates using traditional hypothesis tests and equivalence tests. The main findings are that transfers of willingness to accept are similar to existing transfers of willingness to pay in terms of validity and reliability. Additionally, a sensitivity analysis finds that including demographic variables in the choice model can lead to lower transfer validity though does not substantially affect reliability. Though further research is required, our results suggest that willingness to accept can be transferred as part of policy analyses. Nous avons examiné la fiabilité et la validité de transférer des estimations du consentement marginal à accepter et du surplus compensé. Ce faisant, nous avons utilisé les données de deux études de cas appliquant des expériences de choix pour obtenir les préférences des propriétaires fonciers pour des programmes de conservation des zones humides basés sur des incitations dans deux bassins hydrographiques adjacents du sud de l'Ontario, au Canada (les rivières Grand et Upper Thames en parallèle en 2013). Les données des expériences de choix ont été modélisées en format consentement d'accepter en utilisant un logit multinomial généralisé. La fiabilité du transfert a été étudiée en calculant les erreurs de transfert, tandis que la validité a été examinée en testant l’égalité des fonctions d'utilité et en évaluant la similarité des estimations du bien‐être à l'aide de tests d'hypothèses et d’équivalences classiques. Les principales conclusions sont que les transferts de consentement à accepter sont similaires aux transferts existants de consentement à payer en termes de validité et de fiabilité. En outre, une analyse de sensibilité montre que l'inclusion de variables démographiques dans le modèle de choix peut entraîner une baisse de la validité du transfert, sans toutefois affecter de manière substantielle la fiabilité. Bien que des recherches supplémentaires soient nécessaires, nos résultats suggèrent que le consentement à accepter peut être transféré dans le cadre d'analyses de politiques.

Suggested Citation

  • Ryan Trenholm & Van Lantz & Wolfgang Haider & Duncan Knowler, 2019. "Transfers of landowner willingness to accept: A convergent validity and reliability test using choice experiments in two Canadian watersheds," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 67(2), pages 171-192, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:67:y:2019:i:2:p:171-192
    DOI: 10.1111/cjag.12191
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12191
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/cjag.12191?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:67:y:2019:i:2:p:171-192. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caefmea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.