This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

What’s it worth? Exploring value uncertainty using interval questions in Contingent Valuation

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Nick Hanley
Bengt Kristrom

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In this paper we explore the idea that people only know the value they place on a given environmental change as a range, rather than as a singleton. We use the payment ladder design of contingent valuation, and take as a case study the value of coastal water quality improvements in Scotland. Kaplan-Meier survival curves, Tobit analysis and a modified Turnbull algorithm are used to explore the data. We find that most people state their values as a range, and investigate empirically the determinants of this range. The paper concludes with some thoughts concerning possible links between value ranges, context-dependence and uncertainty.

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.

File URL: http://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_22253_en.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Department of Economics, University of Glasgow in its series Working Papers with number 2002_10.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:gla:glaewp:2002_10

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Adam Smith Building, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8RT
Phone: 0141 330 4618
Fax: 0141 330 4940
Web page: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/economics/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Jeanette Findlay).

Related research
Keywords: contingent valuation; preference uncertainty; payment ladders; contextdependence; coastal water quality; survival analysis;

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: References listed on IDEAS
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.:
  1. Rauli Svento, 1993. "Some notes on trichotomous choice discrete valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 3(6), pages 533-543, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Payne, John W & Bettman, James R & Schkade, David A, 1999. "Measuring Constructed Preferences: Towards a Building Code," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 243-70, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Robin Gregory & James Flynn & Stephen M. Johnson & Theresa A. Satterfield & Paul Slovic & Robert Wagner, 1997. "Decision-Pathway Surveys: A Tool for Resource Managers," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(2), pages 240-254. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. An, Mark Yuying & Ayala, Roberto A., 1996. "Nonparametric Estimation of a Survivor Function with Across-Interval-Censored Data," Working Papers 96-02, Duke University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Dubourg, W R & Jones-Lee, M W & Loomes, Graham, 1997. "Imprecise Preferences and Survey Design in Contingent Valuation," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 64(256), pages 681-702, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Nick Hanley & David Bell & Begona Alvarez-Farizo, 2003. "Valuing the Benefits of Coastal Water Quality Improvements Using Contingent and Real Behaviour," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(3), pages 273-285, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  7. S Georgiou & I H Langford & I J Bateman & R K Turner, 1998. "Determinants of individuals' willingness to pay for perceived reductions in environmental health risks: a case study of bathing water quality," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 30(4), pages 577-594, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Li Chuan-Zhong & Mattsson Leif, 1995. "Discrete Choice under Preference Uncertainty: An Improved Structural Model for Contingent Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 256-269, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Ready Richard C. & Whitehead John C. & Blomquist Glenn C., 1995. "Contingent Valuation When Respondents Are Ambivalent," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 181-196, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Haab, Timothy C. & McConnell, Kenneth E., 1997. "Referendum Models and Negative Willingness to Pay: Alternative Solutions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 251-270, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  11. Richard C. Ready & Ståle Navrud & RW. Richard Dubourg, 2001. "How Do Respondents with Uncertain Willingness to Pay Answer Contingent Valuation Questions?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(3), pages 315-326. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You can use convenient plug-ins to search directly IDEAS from your browser.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-8.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.