IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genres/1598.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluation of the Gains from Combining Travel Cost and Contingent Valuation Data to Value Nonmarket Goods (An)

Author

Listed:
  • Kling, Catherine L.

Abstract

This paper provides a critical assessment of the improvements in precision and bias to welfare measures from combining contingent valuation and travel cost data. Simulation experiments are performed using a variation of the model first suggested by Cameron (1992a) with a focus on identifying likely lower bounds on these gains. In addition to examining single-bounded contingent valuation as a component of the combined model, this paper investigates additional gains that may accrue from employing a double-bounded variant of contingent valuation. Sizable gains in both bias and precision are found in the simulation experiments. The results suggest that additional investigation into these models is warranted.

Suggested Citation

  • Kling, Catherine L., 1997. "Evaluation of the Gains from Combining Travel Cost and Contingent Valuation Data to Value Nonmarket Goods (An)," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1598, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:isu:genres:1598
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Torres, Cati & Hanley, Nick & Riera, Antoni, 2011. "How wrong can you be? Implications of incorrect utility function specification for welfare measurement in choice experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 111-121, July.
    2. Lew, Daniel K. & Larson, Douglas M., 2005. "Accounting for stochastic shadow values of time in discrete-choice recreation demand models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 341-361, September.
    3. repec:sss:wpaper:201407 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Cati Torres & Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley, 2014. "Incorrectly accounting for preference heterogeneity in choice experiments: what are the implications for welfare measurement?," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2014-07, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    5. Музычук, 2012. "Должно Ли Государство Финансировать Культуру? (Научный Доклад)
      [Should the state finance culture?]
      ," Working papers a:pmu374:1, Institute of Economics.
    6. Hoyos, David & Riera, Pere, 2013. "Convergent validity between revealed and stated recreation demand data: Some empirical evidence from the Basque Country, Spain," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 234-248.
    7. Catalina M. Torres Figuerola & Nick Hanley & Antoni Riera Font, 2008. "The implications of incorrect utility function specification for welfare measurement in choice experiments," CRE Working Papers (Documents de treball del CRE) 2008/6, Centre de Recerca Econòmica (UIB ·"Sa Nostra").
    8. Pinuccia Calia & Elisabetta Strazzera, 2000. "Bias and efficiency of single versus double bound models for contingent valuation studies: a Monte Carlo analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(10), pages 1329-1336.
    9. Crooker, John & Kling, Catherine L., 2000. "Nonparametric Bounds on Welfare Measures: A New Tool for Nonmarket Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 145-161, March.
    10. Bockstael, Nancy E. & Freeman III, A. Myrick, 2006. "Welfare Theory and Valuation," Handbook of Environmental Economics,in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 12, pages 517-570 Elsevier.
    11. Colombo, Sergio & Hanley, Nicholas & Torres, Cati, 2011. "Incorrectly accounting for taste heterogeneity in choice experiments: Does it really matter for welfare measurement?," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2011-02, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
    12. Kovacs, Kent F. & Larson, Douglas M., 2006. "Recreation at open space and residential development patterns," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 271502, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Eom, Young-Sook & Larson, Douglas M., 2006. "Improving environmental valuation estimates through consistent use of revealed and stated preference information," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 501-516, July.
    14. Daniel J. Phaneuf & Laura O. Taylor & John B. Braden, 2013. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Data to Estimate Preferences for Residential Amenities: A GMM Approach," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(1), pages 30-52.
    15. Kragt, Marit Ellen & Roebeling, Peter C. & Ruijs, Arjan, 2009. "Effects of Great Barrier Reef degradation on recreational reef-trip demand: a contingent behaviour approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 0(Issue 2), pages 1-17.
    16. Jeuland, Marc & Lucas, Marcelino & Clemens, John & Whittington, Dale, 2010. "Estimating the private benefits of vaccination against cholera in Beira, Mozambique: A travel cost approach," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 310-322, March.
    17. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2007. "Discrete choice survey experiments: A comparison using flexible methods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 122-139, January.

    More about this item

    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:isu:genres:1598. 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: (Curtis Balmer). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.