Better than their reputation: enhancing the validity of contingent valuation mail survey results through citizen expert groups
AbstractAlthough contingent valuation is the dominant technique for the valuation of public projects, especially in the environmental sector, the high costs of contingent valuation surveys prevent the use of this method for the assessment of relatively small projects. The reason for this cost problem is that typically only contingent valuation studies which are based on face-to-face interviews are accepted as leading to valid results. Particularly in countries with high wages, face-to-face surveys are extremely costly considering that for a valid contingent valuation study a minimum of 1000 completed face-to-face interviews is required. This paper tries a rehabilitation of mail surveys as low-budget substitutes for costly face-to-face surveys. Based on an empirical contingent valuation study in Northern Thailand, it is shown that the validity of mail surveys can be improved significantly if so-called Citizen Expert Groups are employed for a thorough survey design.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Taylor and Francis Journals in its journal Journal of Environmental Planning and Management.
Volume (Year): 53 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713429786~db=all
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Börger, Tobias, 2011. "A direct test of socially desirable responding in contingent valuation interviews," FZID Discussion Papers 40-2011, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
- Ahlheim, Michael & Börger, Tobias & Frör, Oliver, 2012. "The ecological price of getting rich in a green desert: A contingent valuation study in rural Southwest China," FZID Discussion Papers 55-2012, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
- Ahlheim, Michael & Börger, Tobias & Frör, Oliver, 2011. "Respondent incentives in contingent valuation: The role of reciprocity," FZID Discussion Papers 39-2011, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
- Ahlheim, Michael & Frör, Oliver & Tong, Jiang & Jing, Luo & Pelz, Sonna, 2013. "Nonuse values of climate policy: An empirical study in Xinjiang and Beijing," FZID Discussion Papers 67-2013, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.