IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/renvpo/v13y2019i2p248-266..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Stated Preference Valuation Methods in Understanding Choices and Informing Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Nick Hanley
  • Mikołaj Czajkowski

Abstract

This article examines the role of stated preference (SP) valuation methods in the environmental economist’s toolbox. Overall, the article makes the case for using SP methods in a wide range of settings, showing how the approach can be used to both inform policy and gain a better understanding of people’s choices and preferences. First, we provide an overview of SP methods and discuss a number of policy design issues where we believe SP methods have advantages over alternative approaches. The ability of SP to overcome “hypothetical market bias” is briefly reviewed. Next, we discuss how SP methods can be used to address research issues concerning people’s preferences and choices, which have broader implications for economics and behavioral sciences. These research issues are (1) the effects of information, learning and knowledge; (2) testing the validity of the standard model of consumer choice; (3) the influence of behavioral drivers such as social norms; and (4) the role of “deep” determinants of preference heterogeneity such as emotions and personality. Finally, we identify some research areas where SP methods may be particularly useful in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Nick Hanley & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2019. "The Role of Stated Preference Valuation Methods in Understanding Choices and Informing Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 248-266.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:renvpo:v:13:y:2019:i:2:p:248-266.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reep/rez005
    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.

    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:oup:renvpo:v:13:y:2019:i:2:p:248-266.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aereeea.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.