IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/agrerw/v30y2001i02p189-197_00.html

The Use of Follow-Up Questions to No Responses in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Curtis, John A.

Abstract

The dichotomous choice contingent valuation survey format collects inexact information on willingness to pay (WTP), that is, whether WTP is greater or less than the bid price. Sometimes researchers make the precise conjecture that certain respondents have zero WTP using information from follow-up motive questions. But follow-up questions are designed to provide information on respondents’ motives, not refined information on the magnitude of WTP. Assuming that certain respondents have WTP = $0.00 is beyond the design of follow-up questions. The paper's results show that unless information from follow-up questions is utilized within the limitations of survey design, welfare and model parameter estimates are likely to have high standard errors leading to inappropriate policy prescriptions.

Suggested Citation

  • Curtis, John A., 2001. "The Use of Follow-Up Questions to No Responses in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Surveys," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(2), pages 189-197, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:agrerw:v:30:y:2001:i:02:p:189-197_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1068280500001131/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of 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:cup:agrerw:v:30:y:2001:i:02:p:189-197_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/age .

    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.