Does Respondent Perception of the Status Quo Matter in Non-Market Valuation with Choice Experiments? An Application to New Zealand Freshwater Streams
In environmental valuation studies with stated preference methods, researchers often provide descriptions of status quo conditions which may differ from those perceived by respondents. Ignoring this difference in utility baselines may affect the magnitude of utility changes and hence bias the implied estimates of benefits from the proposed environmental policies. We investigate this issue using data from a choice experiment on a community’s willingness to pay for water quality improvements in streams. More than 60 percent of respondents perceived the description of the quality of water in streams to be better than the one we provided in our scenario. Our results show that respondents who could provide details of their perception of the status quo displayed stronger preferences for water quality improvements - hence a higher marginal willingness to pay - than their counterparts. Respondents who opted for their own status quo description displayed a higher inclination to remain in the status quo, while their counterparts displayed the contrary. We argue this might be linked to the amount of knowledge each group displayed about the status quo: a kind of reluctance to leave what one knows well.
|Date of creation:||15 Jul 2010|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand, 3240|
Phone: + 64 (0)7 838 4758 (Administrator)
Fax: (647) 838-4331
Web page: http://cms.mngt.waikato.ac.nz/departments/economics
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wai:econwp:10/04. 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: (Brian Silverstone)
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.