IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Using Contingent Valuation to Measure the Compensation Required to Gain Community Acceptance of a Lulu: the Case of a Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility

  • Peter A. Groothuis

    (Westminster College)

  • George Van Houtven

    (Research Triangle Institute)

  • John C. Whitehead

    (East Carolina University)

This article examines an application of the contingent valuation (CV) method to Abstract measure the compensation required for the siting of a hazardous waste disposal facility. First, the risk valuation literature on the siting of a hazardous waste facility is discussed. In this section, the authors discuss past studies using contingent valuation techniques and the importance of subjective risk assessment. Second, a contingent valuation survey is performed to measure willingness to accept (WTA) using a dichotomous choice referendum framework. Using these data, the authors test for the internal consistency of the responses and calculate the WTA for siting a hazardous waste disposal facility. The authors conclude that CV can be used to estimate reasonable measures of WTA and is a potentially useful tool for assessing the compensation required to site a hazardous waste disposal facility.

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

Article provided by in its journal Public Finance Review.

Volume (Year): 26 (1998)
Issue (Month): 3 (May)
Pages: 231-249

in new window

Handle: RePEc:sae:pubfin:v:26:y:1998:i:3:p:231-249
Contact details of provider:

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.:

as in new window
  1. Roberts, Roland K. & Douglas, Peggy V. & Park, William M., 1991. "Estimating External Costs Of Municipal Landfill Siting Through Contingent Valuation Analysis: A Case Study," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 23(02), December.
  2. Groothuis, Peter A & Miller, Gail, 1997. "The Role of Social Distrust in Risk-Benefit Analysis: A Study of the Siting of a Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 241-57, December.
  3. Courant, Paul N. & Porter, Richard C., 1981. "Averting expenditure and the cost of pollution," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 321-329, December.
  4. Hanemann, W Michael, 1991. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 635-47, June.
  5. Kerry Smith, V. & Desvousges, William H., 1986. "Averting behavior: Does it exist?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 291-296.
  6. John B. Loomis, 1987. "Expanding Contingent Value Sample Estimates to Aggregate Benefit Estimates: Current Practices and Proposed Solutions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 63(4), pages 396-402.
  7. Timothy J. Bartik, 2008. "Evaluating the Benefits of Non-marginal Reductions in Pollution Using Information on Defensive Expenditures," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Joseph Herriges & Catherine L. Kling (ed.), Revealed Preference Approaches to Environmental Valuation, volume 0, pages 459-475 W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
  8. Sun, Henglun & Bergstrom, John C. & Dorfman, Jeffrey H., 1992. "Estimating The Benefits Of Groundwater Contamination Control," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(02), December.
  9. Trudy Ann Cameron, 1991. "Interval Estimates of Non-Market Resource Values from Referendum Contingent Valuation Surveys," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(4), pages 413-421.
  10. Cook, Philip J & Graham, Daniel A, 1977. "The Demand for Insurance and Protection: The Case of Irreplaceable Commodities," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 91(1), pages 143-56, February.
  11. Viscusi, W Kip & Evans, William N, 1990. "Utility Functions That Depend on Health Status: Estimates and Economic Implications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 353-74, June.
  12. Shogren, Jason F. & Seung Y. Shin & Dermot J. Hayes & James B. Kliebenstein, 1994. "Resolving Differences in Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(1), pages 255-70, March.
  13. Viscusi, W Kip, 1989. " Prospective Reference Theory: Toward an Explanation of the Paradoxes," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 235-63, September.
  14. Johannesson, Magnus & Johansson, Per-Olov & Kristrom, Bengt & Gerdtham, Ulf-G., 1993. "Willingness to pay for antihypertensive therapy -- further results," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 95-108, April.
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:sae:pubfin:v:26:y:1998:i:3:p:231-249. 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: (SAGE Publications)

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.