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

Non-users' Willingness to Pay for a National Park: An Application and Critique of the Contingent Valuation Method

Listed author(s):
  • Ian Bateman
  • Ian Langford

BATEMAN I. J. and LANGFORD I. H. (1997) Non-users' willingness to pay for a National Park: an application and critique of the contingent valuation method, Reg. Studies 31, 571-582. A great deal of the ongoing academic debate concerning the contingent valuation (CV) method has focused upon whether or not the method is suitable for assessing non-use values. This paper presents results from a study examining non-users' values for preserving the Norfolk Broads, a wetland area of recognized international importance, from the threat of saline flooding. Discussion of results centres upon the validity of the CV method for eliciting unbiased estimates of non-use value. A graphical representation of findings from a variety of studies is presented to suggest that such results are logically ordered across goods and valuation scenarios. However, as the paper concludes, logicality and validity are not necessarily synonymous. BATEMAN I. J. et LANGFORD I. H. (1997) La volonte des non-usagers de payer les parcs nationaux: une application et une critique de la methode de l'evaluation des contingents, Reg. Studies 31, 571-582. Beaucoup du debat academique en cours a propos de la methode de l'evaluation des contingents a porte sur si, oui ou non, la methode convient a l'estimation des valeurs qui se rapportent aux non-usagers. Cet article cherche a presenter des resultats qui proviennent d'une etude qui a examine les valeurs aux non-usagers de preserver du risque de l'inondation saline les Norfolk Broads, des terres marecageuses de renommee et d'importance internationales. La discussion des resultats porte sur la validitede la methode de l'evaluation des contingents comme moyen d'obtenir des estimations sans distorsion de la valeur aux non-usagers. A partir desgraphiques, on presente des resultats qui proviennent des etudes diverses dans le but de proposer que de tels resultats sont organises logiquement a travers des scenarios de produits et d'evaluations. Toujours est-il que, comme le demontre la conclusion, la logique et la validite ne sont pas necessairement synonymes. BATEMAN I. J. und LANGFORD I. H. (1997) Die Bereitschaft von Nichtbenutzern, fu¨r einen Nationalpark zu zahlen: Anwendung und Kritik der Kontingenten Bewertungsmethode, Reg. Studies 31, 571-582. Die gegenwa¨rtige akademische Debatte u¨ber die Kontingente Bewertungsmethode (Contingent Valuation CV) konzentriert sich weitgehend auf die Frage, ob die Methode sich zur Feststellung von Nichtnutzungswerten eignet. Der vorliegende Aufsatz stellt Ergebnisse einer Studie vor, die Nichtbenutzerwerte fu¨r die Bewahrung der Norfolk Broads, einem Feuchtgebiet von international anerkannter Bedeutung, vor der Bedrohung durch U¨berflutung mit Salzwasser zu bewahren. Im Mittelpunkt der Diskussion der Ergebnisse steht die Zuverla¨ssigkeit der CV Methode zur Gewinnung unvoreingenommener Scha¨tzungen des Nichtbenutzerwertes. Es wird eine graphische Darstellung von Befunden verschiedener Studien vorgelegt, die darauf schliessen lassen, dass solche Ergebnisse u¨ber Gu¨ter- und Bewertungsscenarios hinweg logisch geordnet erscheinen. Wie der Aufsatz schlussfolgert, sind jedoch Logik und Zuverla¨ssigkeit nicht unbedingt synonym.

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: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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.

Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Regional Studies.

Volume (Year): 31 (1997)
Issue (Month): 6 ()
Pages: 571-582

in new window

Handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:31:y:1997:i:6:p:571-582
DOI: 10.1080/00343409750131703
Contact details of provider: Web page:

Order Information: Web:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

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:taf:regstd:v:31:y:1997:i:6:p:571-582. 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: (Chris Longhurst)

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.