A potential concern in “multiple bounded discrete choice” contingent valuation surveys – where the respondent is asked to express voting certainty, rather than a simple yes or no, on a large number of payment amounts (bids) – is whether responses are influenced by the particular position of bids in the bid-voting panel rather than solely on the respondent’s willingness to pay (WTP). For instance, respondents may systematically state they would pay the first few bid amounts and not pay all subsequent bids – regardless of the actual dollar values. Such systematic bid design effects would suggest that this method does not provide a valid measure of WTP. Using a split-sample survey, we compare responses to three different bid arrays that have an identical minimum bid, maximum bid, and number of bids. Using nonparametric estimation techniques, we find that estimated WTP distributions and corresponding welfare measures are not statistically different across survey samples. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 29 (2004) Issue (Month): 4 (December) Pages: 401-418 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)