ePrints

Contingent valuation versus choice experiments: Estimating the benefits of environmentally sensitive areas in Scotland: Comment

Lookup NU author(s): Riccardo Scarpa

Downloads

Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.

Abstract

Following Boxall et al. (1996), Hanley et al. (1998) compare welfare measures derived from contingent valuation (CV) to those derived from choice experiment (CE). Using the same Gumbel distribution assumption of the unobserved component of indirect utility, they estimate welfare measures that they expect to be the same. However they fail to acknowledge that the indirect utility specifications underlying the two sets of estimates differ Hence, they do not compare like with like and the difference in welfare estimates cannot be definitely attributed to the difference in the two stated preference methods employed. This comment argues that their econometric analysis is flawed and does not support many of their concluding remarks. Further disagreement is expressed with their alleged findings on the potential performance of cv in benefit transfer studies.

Publication metadata

Author(s): Scarpa R

Publication type: Editorial

Publication status: Published

Journal: Journal of Agricultural Economics

Year: 2000

Volume: 51

Issue: 1

Pages: 122-128

ISSN (print): 0021-857X

ISSN (electronic): 1477-9552

Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2000.tb01213.x

DOI: 10.1111/j.1477-9552.2000.tb01213.x

Share