Willingness to pay for quality improvements: should revealed and stated preference data be combined?

Abstract In this article we propose theoretically consistent welfare measurement of use and nonuse values for an improvement in environmental quality with revealed and stated preference data. An analytical model based on the comparative static analysis of the variation function that describes the relationship between recreation demand and dichotomous choice contingent valuation models is estimated. Our results show that revealed and stated data should not be combined under the same assumed preference structure unless the two decisions imply the same change in behavior induced by the quality change. In addition, our results indicate scope effects in willingness to pay measures estimated with stated preference data.

[1]  John B. Loomis.  An investigation into the reliability of intended visitation behavior , 1993 .

[2]  John B. Loomis,et al.  Improving Validity Experiments of Contingent Valuation Methods: Results of Efforts to Reduce the Disparity of Hypothetical and Actual Willingness to Pay , 1996 .

[3]  Trudy Ann Cameron,et al.  Efficient Estimation Methods for "Closed-ended' Contingent Valuation Surveys , 1987 .

[4]  J. Boyce,et al.  Economic Valuation of the Chinook Salmon Sport Fishery of the Gulkana River, Alaska, under Current and Alternate Management Plans , 1996 .

[5]  J. Whitehead.  Willingness to pay for quality improvements: comparative statics and interpretation of contingent valuation results. , 1995 .

[6]  Helen R. Neill,et al.  Hypothetical Surveys and Real Economic Commitments , 1994 .

[7]  Jeffrey Englin,et al.  Augmenting travel cost models with contingent behavior data , 1996 .

[8]  T. Cameron.  Interval Estimates of Non-Market Resource Values from Referendum Contingent Valuation Surveys , 1991 .

[9]  Trudy Ann Cameron,et al.  Combining Contingent Valuation and Travel Cost Data for the Valuation of Nonmarket Goods , 1992 .

[10]  K. McConnell.  Models for referendum data: The structure of discrete choice models for contingent valuation , 1990 .

[11]  K. McConnell,et al.  Count Data Models and the Problem of Zeros in Recreation Demand Analysis , 1996 .

[12]  Richard T. Carson,et al.  Contingent Valuation and Revealed Preference Methodologies: Comparing the Estimates for Quasi-Public Goods , 1995 .

[13]  J. Louviere,et al.  The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models , 1993 .

[14]  Mario E. Niklitschek,et al.  Combining Intended Demand and Yes/No Responses in the Estimation of Contingent Valuation Models , 1996 .

[15]  J. Louviere,et al.  Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities , 1994 .

[16]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Perceptions versus Objective Measures of Environmental Quality in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Models of Environmental Valuation , 1997 .