Contingent Valuation of Competing Public Sector Programmes: An Experiment of Single versus Joint Evaluation
In this paper, we compare single and joint evaluation (JE) of competing public sector programmes in a contingent valuation exercise. Using survey data aimed at evaluating WTP for cancer interventions (n = 2628), we disantangle two types of effects of JE: informational effects and sequence effects. By the former, wemean: by presenting different programmes to respondents, they will acquire more information on each programme than they would if each programme was valued in isolation. Sequence effects are underisable and induced by the JE exercise itself: changing the order of the valuation sequence induces different WTP values.Our results show that there are informational effects but no sequence effects. We therefore argue that JE approaches can be added to the armoury of techniques aimed at designing better survey instruments in a way that induces informational effects without incurring problems of sequencing.
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.
| Length: | |
| Date of creation: | 28 May 2008 |
| Handle: | RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-00282844 |
| Note: | View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00282844 |
| Contact details of provider: | Web page: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/
|
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:hal:wpaper:halshs-00282844. 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: (CCSD)
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.