IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Test Of Contingent Market Bid Elicitation Procedures For Piecewise Valuation


  • Bergstrom, John C.
  • Stoll, John R.


Economists are frequently faced with the task of valuing commodity package components. The valuation of specific impacts of public policies is a case in point. Two contingent market bid elicitation procedures were tested for valuing changes in single components of multicomponent government program. Results of the test suggested that respondents provided more accurate component to piecewise valuation when a two-step bidding approach, rather than a one-step approach was used. Thus, there is evidence that a two-step approach which helps respondents to isolate valuations for package components is perhaps a preferable bid elicitation procedure for piecewise valuation.

Suggested Citation

  • Bergstrom, John C. & Stoll, John R., 1987. "A Test Of Contingent Market Bid Elicitation Procedures For Piecewise Valuation," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 12(02), December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:wjagec:32234

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Morey, Edward R., 1985. "Characteristics, consumer surplus, and new activities : A proposed ski area," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 221-236, March.
    2. Brookshire, David S, et al, 1982. "Valuing Public Goods: A Comparison of Survey and Hedonic Approaches," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 165-177, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Research Methods/ Statistical Methods;


    Access and download statistics


    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:ags:wjagec:32234. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.