IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/duk/dukeec/95-52.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Contingent Valuation Estimations Pass a 'Scope' Test?A Meta Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Smith, Kerry
  • Laura Osborne

Abstract

This paper considers two tests proposed to judge the internal consistency of contingent valuation estimates. Both tests are quite sensitive to the maintained hypotheses required to derive fairly precise expectations for the properties of WTP functions. This result suggests a different approach may be needed in gauging the reliability of CV. This paper describes an alternative approach that relies on a weight of the evidence criterion and uses meta analysis to develop a systematic appraisal of what are the economic values of changes in amenity resources. The approach is illustrated for the case of estimating people's willingness to pay for improving (or maintaining) visibility at the national parks.

Suggested Citation

  • Smith, Kerry & Laura Osborne, 1995. "Do Contingent Valuation Estimations Pass a 'Scope' Test?A Meta Analysis," Working Papers 95-52, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:duk:dukeec:95-52
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H42 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Private Goods
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis

    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:duk:dukeec:95-52. 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: Department of Economics Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://econ.duke.edu/ .

    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.