Willingness to pay for environmental goods in Norway: A contingent valuation study with real payment
The study seeks to determine the maximum willingness to pay (MWTP) among a random sample of Norwegians, for membership in the largest environmentalist association in Norway, Norges Naturvernforbund (NNV). The study includes three stages: (1) a contingent valuation study, testing hypothetical MWTP; (2) those whose stated MWTP is at or above the current membership fee are then asked to pay this fee; (3) those individuals who do not pay in stage 2 are interviewed, and asked to consider revising their MWTP statement. The study is seemingly the first of its kind in comparing hypothetical and actual MWTP by typing valuation of a public good (the environment) to the value of a private good (membership of the NNV). The results show a rather poor correspondence between hypothetical and actual MWTP, since only 6 out of 64 who stated that they were willing to pay the membership fee in stage 1, actually paid this voluntarily in stage 2. Possible reasons for this discrepancy are discussed, on the basis of data from the telephone interview in stage 3, and on information gathered in stage 1. The data indicate that a substantial part of this discrepancy is due to MWTP being overstated in stage 1, but that other reasons also are important. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 2 (1992)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100263|
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Bohm, Peter, 1972. "Estimating demand for public goods: An experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 111-130.
- Carson, Richard T. & Hanemann, W. Michael, 2006. "Contingent Valuation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 17, pages 821-936 Elsevier.
- Rowe, Robert D. & D'Arge, Ralph C. & Brookshire, David S., 1980. "An experiment on the economic value of visibility," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 1-19, March.
- Kealy, Mary Jo & Montgomery, Mark & Dovidio, John F., 1990. "Reliability and predictive validity of contingent values: Does the nature of the good matter?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 244-263, November.
- Hoehn, John P & Randall, Alan, 1989. "Too Many Proposals Pass the Benefit Cost Test," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 544-51, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:2:y:1992:i:1:p:91-106. 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: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.