IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Compliance Bias in Dichotomous Choice CVM: Some Evidence From a Utah Wilderness Study


  • Keith, John E.
  • Christopher Fawson.


Responses to a dichotomous choice contingent valuation (DCCV) of wilderness designation in Utah were used to determine if individuals who identified themselves as having no opinion or being neutral to wilderness designation in general and for two specific wilderness proposals would have nonnegative willingness to pay for such designation. In cases for which a sufficient number of observations permitted estimation, the estimated willingness to pay was positive and significantly different from zero and often exceeded that of individuals who identified themselves as supporting wilderness designation. This appears to support the contention that DCCV studies may generate values from respondents whether or not those respondents truly have positive willingness to pay.

Suggested Citation

  • Keith, John E. & Christopher Fawson., 1996. "Compliance Bias in Dichotomous Choice CVM: Some Evidence From a Utah Wilderness Study," Working Papers 9627, Utah State University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:usu:wpaper:9627

    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.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. David P. Baron, 1985. "Noncooperative Regulation of a Nonlocalized Externality," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(4), pages 553-568, Winter.
    2. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1991. "Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061414, January.
    3. Carraro, Carlo & Siniscalco, Domenico, 1993. "Strategies for the international protection of the environment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 309-328, October.
    4. Downing, Thomas E & Kates, Robert W, 1982. "The International Response to the Threat of Chlorofluorocarbons to Atmospheric Ozone," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(2), pages 267-272, May.
    5. Todd Sandler & Keith Sargent, 1995. "Management of Transnational Commons: Coordination, Publicness, and Treaty Formation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 71(2), pages 145-162.
    6. Hoel, Michael, 1991. "Global environmental problems: The effects of unilateral actions taken by one country," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 55-70, January.
    7. Kofman, Fred & Lawarree, Jacques, 1993. "Collusion in Hierarchical Agency," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 629-656, May.
    8. Barrett, Scott, 1994. "Self-Enforcing International Environmental Agreements," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 878-894, Supplemen.
    9. B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1985. "Common Marketing Agency as a Device for Facilitating Collusion," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(2), pages 269-281, Summer.
    10. Bernheim, B Douglas & Whinston, Michael D, 1986. "Common Agency," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(4), pages 923-942, July.
    11. Hurley, Terrance M. & Shogren, Jason F., 1997. "Environmental Conflicts and the SLAPP," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 253-273, July.
    12. Tirole, Jean, 1986. "Hierarchies and Bureaucracies: On the Role of Collusion in Organizations," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 181-214, Fall.
    13. Bernauer, Thomas, 1995. "The effect of international environmental institutions: how we might learn more," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(02), pages 351-377, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:usu:wpaper:9627. 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: (John Gilbert). General contact details of provider: .

    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.