Contingent Valuation: Economics, Law and Politics

There exists within the U.S. today, a debate that draws interest from three spheres of activity that only on occasion have interests in common. The debate concerns the technique of public good valuation known as contingent valuation (CV), and the participants in the debate are drawn from the distinct worlds of academic social science research, law, and politics. The last significant collision of economics, law and politics in the U.S. resulted in the court ordered breakup of the U.S. telecommunications monopoly (AT&T), the political trend toward deregulation of some major U.S. industries (transportation being the most notable) and the ushering in of a new and highly productive era for an old sub-discipline in economics known as industrial organization. It is likely, although not assured, that the debate surrounding CV could lead to similarly substantive results in the areas of law, public policy and social science research.

[1]  L. Goulder,et al.  Environmental taxation and the double dividend: A reader's guide , 1995 .

[2]  J. Hausman,et al.  Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number? , 1994 .

[3]  V. Smith,et al.  Arbitrary values, good causes, and premature verdicts , 1992 .

[4]  Sandy Gordon,et al.  Breaking the Vicious Circle , 1995 .

[5]  W. Michael Hanemann,et al.  Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation , 1994 .

[6]  Jerry A. Hausman,et al.  Contingent valuation : a critical assessment , 1993 .

[7]  S. Ciriacy-Wantrup,et al.  Capital Returns from Soil-Conservation Practices , 1947 .

[8]  Kevin J. Boyle,et al.  Measuring Natural Resource Damages with Contingent Valuation: Tests of Validity and Reliability , 1993 .

[9]  W. Hanemann,et al.  A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting From the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill , 1992 .

[10]  Jon Strand,et al.  Willingness to pay for environmental goods in Norway: A contingent valuation study with real payment , 1990 .

[11]  A. Sen,et al.  Rational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioral Foundations of Economic Theory , 1977 .

[12]  Paul R. Portney,et al.  The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care , 1994 .

[13]  J. Hausman,et al.  ON CONTINGENT VALUATION MEASUREMENT OF NONUSE VALUES , 1993 .

[14]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction , 1992 .

[15]  Robert H. Nelson,et al.  Why existence value should not be used in cost‐benefit analysis , 1992 .

[16]  W. Michael Hanemann,et al.  Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation , 1991 .

[17]  Gregory K. Leonard,et al.  Chapter II – Does Contingent Valuation Measure Preferences? Experimental Evidence , 1993 .

[18]  Richard B. Belzer,et al.  Chapter 16: CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING RESULTS OBTAINED FROM CONTINGENT VALUATION METHODS , 1995 .