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! ]

Starting-point bias and respondent uncertainty in dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Emmanuel Flachaire () (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - CNRS : UMR8174 - Université Panthéon-Sorbonne - Paris I)
Guillaume Hollard (OEP - Université de Marne-la-Vallée)

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

Abstract

In this article, we develop a dichotomous choice model with follow-up questions that describes the willingness to pay being uncertain in an interval. The initial response is subject to starting point bias. Our model provides an alternative interpretation of the starting point bias in the dichotomous choice valuation surveys. Using the Exxon Valdez survey, we show that, when uncertain, individuals tend to answer "yes".

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://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/17/59/25/PDF/Flachaire_Hollard_07b.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by HAL in its series Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) with number halshs-00175925_v1.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Sep 2007
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published, Resource and Energy Economics, 2007, 29, 3, 183-194
Handle: RePEc:hal:cesptp:halshs-00175925_v1

Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00175925/en/
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/

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

Related research
Keywords: starting point bias ; preference uncertainty ; contingent valuation;

Other versions of this item:

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. Welsh, Michael P. & Poe, Gregory L., 1998. "Elicitation Effects in Contingent Valuation: Comparisons to a Multiple Bounded Discrete Choice Approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 170-185, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Alberini, Anna & Boyle, Kevin & Welsh, Michael, 2003. "Analysis of contingent valuation data with multiple bids and response options allowing respondents to express uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 40-62, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. DeShazo, J. R., 2002. "Designing Transactions without Framing Effects in Iterative Question Formats," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 360-385, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. John C. Whitehead, 2002. "Incentive Incompatibility and Starting-Point Bias in Iterative Valuation Questions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(2), pages 285-297. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Herriges, Joseph A. & Shogren, Jason F., 1996. "Starting Point Bias in Dichotomous Choice Valuation with Follow-Up Questioning," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 112-131, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  6. Emmanuel Flachaire & Guillaume Hollard, 2006. "Controlling Starting-Point Bias in Double-Bounded Contingent Valuation Surveys," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(1), pages 103-111. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  7. Richard Carson & Robert Mitchell & Michael Hanemann & Raymond Kopp & Stanley Presser & Paul Ruud, 2003. "Contingent Valuation and Lost Passive Use: Damages from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(3), pages 257-286, July. [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. van Kooten, G Cornelis & Krcmar, Emina & Bulte, Erwin H, 2001. " Preference Uncertainty in Non-market Valuation: A Fuzzy Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, American Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 83(3), pages 487-500, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Cameron Trudy Ann & Quiggin John, 1994. "Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data from a Dichotomous Choice with Follow-Up Questionnaire," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 218-234, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  12. 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

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.)

  1. Marit Kragt & Jeff Bennett, 2008. "Designing Choice Experiments to Test for Anchoring and Framing Effects," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0810, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School, Australian National University. [Downloadable!]
  2. Marit E Kragt & Jeff Bennett, . "What’s appropriate? Investigating the Effects of Attribute Level Framing and Changing Cost Levels in Choice Experiments," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0917, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School, Australian National University. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? The most prolific authors have over 700 items listed on IDEAS.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-4.

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.