Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
P. Diamond (1996)
Testing the Internal Consistency of Contingent Valuation SurveysJournal of Environmental Economics and Management, 30
Michael Kemp, Christopher Maxwell (1993)
EXPLORING A BUDGET CONTEXT FOR CONTINGENT VALUATION ESTIMATES, 220
P. Diamond, J. Hausman (1993)
ON CONTINGENT VALUATION MEASUREMENT OF NONUSE VALUES, 220
D. McFadden, Gregory Leonard (1993)
Issues in the Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods: Methodologies for Data Collection and AnalysisContributions to economic analysis, 220
(1993)
Contingent Valuation of Natural Resource Damages Due to Injuries to the Upper Clark Fork River Basin," State of Montana
G. Urban, G. Katz, Thomas Hatch, A. Silk (1983)
The ASSESSOR Pre-Test Market Evaluation SystemInterfaces, 13
Rebecca Johnson, G. Johnson (1990)
Economic Valuation of Natural Resources: Issues, Theory, and Applications, Rebecca L. Johnson and Gary V. Johnson, eds. 1990. Westview Press, Boulder, CO. 240 pages. ISBN: 0-8133-7838-9. $32.50Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 12
J. Andreoni (1989)
Giving with Impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian EquivalenceJournal of Political Economy, 97
M. Dickie, A. Fisher, S. Gerking (1987)
Market Transactions and Hypothetical Demand Data: A Comparative StudyJournal of the American Statistical Association, 82
Seymour Sudman, Robert Mitchell, Richard Carson (1991)
Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method.Contemporary Sociology, 20
(1983)
Establishing and Valuing the Effects of Improved Visibility in the Eastern United States," Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection
David Magleby (1984)
Direct Legislation: Voting on Ballot Propositions in the United States
(1992)
Field Testing Existence Values: An Instream Flow Trust Fund for Montana Rivers," mimeo
D. Kahneman, Ilana Ritov (1994)
Determinants of stated willingness to pay for public goods: A study in the headline methodJournal of Risk and Uncertainty, 9
W. Desvousges, F. Johnson, R. Dunford, S. Hudson, K. Wilson, K. Boyle (1993)
Measuring Natural Resource Damages with Contingent Valuation: Tests of Validity and ReliabilityContributions to economic analysis, 220
J. Hoehn, A. Randall (1989)
Too Many Proposals Pass the Benefit-Cost Test: ReplyThe American Economic Review, 81
J. Hausman (1993)
IS SYMPATHY AN ECONOMIC VALUE
H. Neill, R. Cummings, P. Ganderton, G. Harrison, T. Mcguckin (1994)
Hypothetical Surveys and Real Economic CommitmentsLand Economics, 70
Kalle Seip, J. Strand (1990)
Willingness to pay for environmental goods in Norway: A contingent valuation study with real paymentEnvironmental and Resource Economics, 2
D. Kahneman, J. Knetsch (1992)
Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfactionJournal of Environmental Economics and Management, 22
R. Bishop, T. Heberlein (1979)
Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 61
Denise Scheberle (1995)
Breaking the Vicious Circle: Toward Effective Risk Regulation . Stephen Breyer Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993, 160 pp. US$22.95 cloth. ISBN 0-674-08114-5. Harvard University Press, 79 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.Politics and the Life Sciences, 14
P. Diamond, J. Hausman, Gregory Leonard, Mike Denning (1993)
Chapter II – Does Contingent Valuation Measure Preferences? Experimental EvidenceContributions to economic analysis, 220
R. Carson, R. Mitchell, W. Hanemann, R. Kopp, S. Presser, P. Ruud (1992)
A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting From the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
J. Hausman (1993)
Contingent valuation : a critical assessment
D. Schkade, J. Payne (1993)
Where Do the Numbers Come From? How People Respond to Contingent Valuation QuestionsContributions to economic analysis, 220
Abstract Without market outcomes for comparison, internal consistency tests, particularly adding-up tests, are needed for credibility. When tested, contingent valuation has failed. Proponents find surveys tested poorly done. To the authors’ knowledge, no survey has passed these tests. The ‘embedding effect’ is the similarity of willingness-to-pay responses that theory suggests (and sometimes requires) be different. This problem has long been recognized but not solved. The authors conclude that current methods are not suitable for damage assessment or benefit-cost analysis. They believe the problems come from an absence of preferences, not a flaw in survey methodology, making improvement unlikely.
Journal of Economic Perspectives – American Economic Association
Published: Nov 1, 1994
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.