IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Révélation du CAP : question ouverte ou question fermée ? Une application à la biodiversité des forêts riveraines de la Garonne

Listed author(s):
  • Caroline Gauthier
Registered author(s):

    [eng] WTP Revelation: Open-Ended or Dichotomous-Choice Questions? An Application to the Biodiversity of the Garonne River Forests by Caroline Gauthier This paper offers a contingent valuation of individuals' willingness to pay for preservation of biodiversity. It is the first study of its kind to be carried out in France. It has been conducted according to the rules proposed by the NOAA Panel, with the exception of the revelation method. The sample of 402 individuals interviewed was divided into those who declared their WTP on the basis of an open-ended question and those who declared it on the basis of a dichotomous-choice question. The two formats were then compared. The paper offers two tests demonstrating that the WTPs calculated by each method are not significantly different. Although the NOAA Panel recommends use of the closed format, this paper shows that use of the open-ended question is equally relevant and less expensive given the level of information required. [fre] Cet article présente une évaluation contingente du consentement à payer des individus pour la préservation de la biodiversité. C'est la première étude de ce type réalisée en France. L'étude est menée selon les règles proposées par le NOAA Panel, à l'exception de la méthode de révélation. L'échantillon des 402 individus interrogés est scindé entre ceux qui annoncent leur CAP suite à une question ouverte et ceux qui l'annoncent suite à une question fermée. Les deux formats sont ensuite comparés. L'article propose deux tests pour montrer que les CAP estimés par les deux méthodes ne sont pas significativement différents. Alors que le NOAA Panel préconise l'usage du format fermé, cet article montre que l'usage de la question ouverte est aussi pertinent et moins coûteux étant donné le niveau d'information souhaité.

    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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by Programme National Persée in its journal Économie & prévision.

    Volume (Year): 143 (2000)
    Issue (Month): 2 ()
    Pages: 237-245

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_2000_num_143_2_6106
    Note: DOI:10.3406/ecop.2000.6106
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:

    in new window

    1. Spash, Clive L. & Hanley, Nick, 1995. "Preferences, information and biodiversity preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 191-208, March.
    2. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 1993. "Estimation and Inference in Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195060119.
    3. Thayer, Mark A., 1981. "Contingent valuation techniques for assessing environmental impacts: Further evidence," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 27-44, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_2000_num_143_2_6106. 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: (Equipe PERSEE)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.