IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/caerpp/v8y2016i3p412-429.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Alternative approaches to treat respondent uncertainty in contingent willingness to pay estimation

Author

Listed:
  • Jia Wang
  • Jiaoju Ge

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to theoretically using two new models to analyze the effect of respondents’ uncertainty about their stated willingness to pay (WTP) on welfare estimates in the contingent valuation method (CVM) theoretically using two new models, and empirically to reveal consumers’ WTP to improve drinking water supply safety (WSS) in China. Design/methodology/approach - In this paper, two alternative preference uncertainty treatment approaches are proposed to estimate consumers’ WTP theoretically and they are applied to China’s WSS improvement program from a payment card method, which depends on how consumers’ certainty level about their valuation is. Furthermore, four regression models are presented to investigate the determinants of consumers’ WTP. Findings - Theoretically, the alternative approaches that proposed in this research can remove overestimation bias from traditional CVM method but with lower estimation efficiency. In addition, the empirical results of the uncertainty adjusted models show that the expected WTP to improve drinking WSS is from 0.55 to 0.56 Renminbi yuan/ton, which are lower than the estimates from the conventional standard CVM models. Consumers’ preferences for their concerns about WSS, attitudes toward WSS improvement programs, trusts in implement authorities and their knowledge of WSS have significant effects on the WTP for improving drinking WSS and on respondents’ uncertainty too. Originality/value - Theoretically to the authors’ knowledge, it is the first attempt to compare alternative approaches to treat respondent uncertainty using numerical certainty scale combined with payment card format valuation questions in CVM. Empirically it is the first study at this large scale that investigates consumers’ WTP for improving drinking WSS incorporating with respondent uncertainty in China. In addition, to assess consumer preferences for improved drinking water safety and the sources of uncertainty, information on consumers’ attitudes toward WSS are considered at the first time.

Suggested Citation

  • Jia Wang & Jiaoju Ge, 2016. "Alternative approaches to treat respondent uncertainty in contingent willingness to pay estimation," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(3), pages 412-429, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:caerpp:v:8:y:2016:i:3:p:412-429
    DOI: 10.1108/CAER-11-2015-0153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/CAER-11-2015-0153/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/CAER-11-2015-0153/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/CAER-11-2015-0153?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
    ---><---

    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. Jia Wang & Jiaoju Ge & Zhifeng Gao, 2018. "Consumers’ Preferences and Derived Willingness-to-Pay for Water Supply Safety Improvement: The Analysis of Pricing and Incentive Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, May.

    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:eme:caerpp:v:8:y:2016:i:3:p:412-429. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.