IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare97/136495.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Comparison of Stated Preference Techniques for Estimating Environmental Values

Author

Listed:
  • Morrison, Mark
  • Blamey, Russell K.
  • Bennett, Jeffrey W.
  • Louviere, Jordan

Abstract

The use of stated preference (SP) techniques for estimating environmental values has increased substantially in recent years. However, criticism about the most widespread SP technique used for valuing environmental resources, the contingent valuation method (CVM), suggests that there is a need to not only refine the CVM, but to develop alternative SP techniques. In this paper the CVM is compared with four other SP techniques: contingent rating, contingent ranking, paired comparison and choice modelling. The techniques are compared in terms of their methodologies and the validity and reliability of the results they produce. The appropriateness of using each of the SP techniques in different environmental valuation applications is also discussed. It was concluded that while the CVM is prone to bias and has some practical limitations, when applied appropriately it can be used to produce theoretically valid results. Three of the other techniques- contingent rating, contingent raking, and paired comparison- are found to have weak theoretical bases and do not produce economically valid valuation estimates. The final SP technique examined, choice modelling, appears to have considerable potential for providing useful and valid estimates of environmental values.

Suggested Citation

  • Morrison, Mark & Blamey, Russell K. & Bennett, Jeffrey W. & Louviere, Jordan, 1997. "A Comparison of Stated Preference Techniques for Estimating Environmental Values," 1997 Conference (41st), January 22-24, 1997, Gold Coast, Australia 136495, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare97:136495
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.136495
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/136495/files/fiche011-report093.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.136495?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:ags:aare97:136495. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.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.