IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxecpp/v47y1995i4p676-95.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuing the Prevention of Non-fatal Road Injuries: Contingent Valuation vs. Standard Gambles

Author

Listed:
  • Jones-Lee, Michael W
  • Loomes, Graham
  • Philips, P R

Abstract

In 1991, the U.K. Department of Transport commissioned a nationally representative sample survey with a view to estimating willingness-to-pay based monetary values for the prevention of nonfatal road injuries. The study design was somewhat unusual in that it involved not one but two main value elicitation procedures--contingent valuation and standard gambles. Although both procedures are rooted in the same conventional theoretical foundations, they produced substantially and systematically different empirical estimates of the values being sought. This paper reports the findings of the study and examines possible reasons for the disparities referred to. Copyright 1995 by Royal Economic Society.

Suggested Citation

  • Jones-Lee, Michael W & Loomes, Graham & Philips, P R, 1995. "Valuing the Prevention of Non-fatal Road Injuries: Contingent Valuation vs. Standard Gambles," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(4), pages 676-695, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxecpp:v:47:y:1995:i:4:p:676-95
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-7653%28199510%292%3A47%3A4%3C676%3AVTPONR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T&origin=bc
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:oxecpp:v:47:y:1995:i:4:p:676-95. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/oep .

    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.