IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/econom/v64y1997i256p681-702.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Imprecise Preferences and Survey Design in Contingent Valuation

Author

Listed:
  • Dubourg
  • Jones‐Lee
  • Graham Loomes

Abstract

During recent years, the contingent valuation (CV) method has been widely used to value non‐marketed goods and services. We present the results of a CV study of the value of road safety. We find that stated preferences for road safety exhibit considerable imprecision, appear subject to various systematic biases, and are insensitive to variations in the quantity and quality of the safety improvements concerned. One broad implication of these findings may be that, for an important class of goods (of which safety is one example), standard assumptions about the structure of people's preferences may be much too strong. A more specific implication, concerning the design and conduct of CV surveys, is that the NOAA Panel's widely cited blueprint for ‘good CV practice’ may rely far too heavily on assumptions about the precision and sensitivity of people's preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Dubourg & Jones‐Lee & Graham Loomes, 1997. "Imprecise Preferences and Survey Design in Contingent Valuation," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 64(256), pages 681-702, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:econom:v:64:y:1997:i:256:p:681-702
    DOI: 10.1111/1468-0335.00106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0335.00106
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1468-0335.00106?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:econom:v:64:y:1997:i:256:p:681-702. 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/lsepsuk.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.