IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ajarec/v51y2007i1p91-107.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ambivalent statements in contingent valuation studies: inclusive response formats and giving respondents time to think

Author

Listed:
  • Henrik Svedsater

Abstract

A recent concern in the valuation literature is the uncertainty respondents feel when posed with willingness-to-pay questions for environmental amenities in hypothetical market scenarios. Using a multiple-bounded discrete-choice format, the results indicate that respondents become less ambivalent when allowed considerable time to think about the valuation task before a response is elicited. In particular they tend to reduce the reported willingness to pay associated with low certainty of paying, hence resulting in more conservative welfare estimates. Implications for the application of environmental valuation techniques are discussed. Copyright 2007 The Author 2007 Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society Inc. and Blackwell Publishing Ltd .

Suggested Citation

  • Henrik Svedsater, 2007. "Ambivalent statements in contingent valuation studies: inclusive response formats and giving respondents time to think," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(1), pages 91-107, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ajarec:v:51:y:2007:i:1:p:91-107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-8489.2007.00346.x
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tuan, Tran Huu & Navrud, Stale, 2009. "Applying the dissonance-minimising format to value cultural heritage in developing countries," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(3), pages 1-17.
    2. Joseph Cook & Marc Jeuland & Brian Maskery & Dale Whittington, 2012. "Giving Stated Preference Respondents “Time to Think”: Results From Four Countries," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 473-496, April.
    3. Voltaire, Louinord & Pirrone, Claudio & Bailly, Denis, 2013. "Dealing with preference uncertainty in contingent willingness to pay for a nature protection program: A new approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 76-85.
    4. Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & François-Charles Wolff & Jason Shogren & Pascal Gastineau, 2017. "Interval bidding in a distribution elicitation format," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(51), pages 5200-5211, November.
    5. Virpi Lehtoranta & Anna-Kaisa Kosenius & Elina Seppälä, 2017. "Watershed Management Benefits in a Hypothetical, Real Intention and Real Willingness to Pay Approach," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(13), pages 4117-4132, October.
    6. Kim, Seon-Ae & Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Paudel, Krishna P., 2008. "Rotational grazing adoption in cattle production under a cost-share agreement: does uncertainty have a role in conservation technology adoption?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(3), pages 1-18.
    7. Hoffmann, Christin & Abraham, Charles & White, Mathew P. & Skippon, Stephen M., 2020. "Ambivalent about travel mode choice? A qualitative investigation of car user and non-car user attitudes," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 323-338.

    More about this item

    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:bla:ajarec:v:51:y:2007:i:1:p:91-107. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.html .

    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.