Sensitivity to scale in stated preference valuation methods. A comparison of methods based on valuation of heath in Denmark

Author

Jette Bredahl Jacobsen, Bo Thorsen (bjt@ifro.ku.dk) and Alex Dubgaard

Scandinavian Forest Economics: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics, 8-11, issue 41

Abstract: We compare two methods of stated preference valuation techniques -dichotomous choice contingent valuation and choice experiments – to test for the prevalence of embedding. The test is based on a survey of willingness to pay for the preservation of heath areas in Denmark. Using only one outcome alternative and a status quo in the choice experiment we can compare the two methods using exactly the same estimation procedure. Thereby the differences found can be attributed to the different questioning formats alone. We find differences between the methods, especially regarding the sensitivity to scale.

Keywords: Environmental valuation; stated preferences; choice experiment; contingent valuation; health; nature conservation.; Environmental Economics and Policy; International Development; Environmental valuation; stated preferences; choice experiment; contingent valuation; heath; nature conservation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link)
http://purl.umn.edu/198451 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:ssfesf:198451

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Scandinavian Forest Economics: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics from  Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Series data maintained by AgEcon Search (aesearch@umn.edu).

For further details log on website :
http://econpapers.repec.org/article/agsssfesf/198451.htm