Payment and Policy Consequentiality in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation: Experimental Design Effects on Self-Reported Perceptions

References

1. ↵
   1. Abate, Tenaw G.,
   2. TobiasBörger,
   3. MargretheAanesen,
   4. JannikeFalk-Andersson,
   5. Kayleigh J.Wyles, and
   6. Nicola J.Beaumont

   . 2020. “Valuation of Marine Plastic Pollution in the European Arctic: Applying an Integrated Choice and Latent Variable Model to Contingent Valuation.”Ecological Economics169: 106521.

   OpenUrl
2. ↵
   1. Beaumont, Nicola J.,
   2. MargretheAanesen,
   3. Melanie C.Austen,
   4. TobiasBörger,
   5. James R.Clark,
   6. MatthewCole,
   7. TaraHooper,
   8. Penelope K.Lindeque,
   9. ChristinePascoe, and
   10. Kayleigh J.Wyles

   . 2019. “Global Ecological, Social and Economic Impacts of Marine Plastic.”Marine Pollution Bulletin142: 189–195.

   OpenUrl
3. ↵
   1. Bergmann, Melanie,
   2. NadjaSandhop,
   3. IngoSchewe, and
   4. DiederikDHert

   . 2016. “Observations of Floating Anthropogenic Litter in the Barents Sea and Fram Strait, Arctic.”Polar Biology39(3): 553–60.

   OpenUrl
4. ↵
   1. Bergmann, Melanie,
   2. BirgitLutz,
   3. Mine B.Tekman, and
   4. LarsGutow

   . 2017. “Citizen Scientists Reveal: Marine Litter Pollutes Arctic Beaches and Affects Wild Life.”Marine Pollution Bulletin125(1–2): 535–40.

   OpenUrl
5. ↵
   1. Budzi´nski, Wiktor, and
   2. MikołajCzajkowski

   . 2018. “Hybrid Choice Models vs. Endogeneity of Indicator Variables: A Monte Carlo Investigation.”Working paper 21/2018. Warsaw, Poland: University of Warsaw. Available at https://www.wne.uw.edu.pl/files/6215/3933/4572/WNE_WP280.pdf.
6. ↵
   1. Budzi´nski, Wiktor,
   2. MikołajCzajkowski, and
   3. EwaZawojska

   . 2019. “Endogeneity of Self-Reported Consequentiality in Stated Preference Studies.”Paper presented at the International Choice Modelling Conference, Kobe, Japan, August19–21.
7. ↵
   1. Carson, Richard T., and
   2. TheodoreGroves

   . 2007. “Incentive and Informational Properties of Preference Questions.”Environmental and Resource Economics37(1): 181–210.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
8. ↵
   1. Carson, Richard T.,
   2. W. MichaelHanemann,
   3. Raymond J.Kopp,
   4. Jon A.Krosnick,
   5. RobertCameron Mitchell,
   6. StanleyPresser,
   7. Paul A.Ruud,
   8. V. KerrySmith,
   9. MichaelConaway, and
   10. KerryMartin

   . 1998. “Referendum Design and Contingent Valuation: The NOAA Panels No-Vote Recommendation.”Review of Economics and Statistics80(2): 335–38.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
9. ↵
   1. Champ, Patricia A.,
   2. Nicholas E.Flores,
   3. Thomas C.Brown, and
   4. JamesChivers

   . 2002. “Contingent Valuation and Incentives.”Land Economics78(4): 591–604.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
10. ↵
    1. Czajkowski, Mikołaj,
    2. Christian A.Vossler,
    3. WiktorBudzi´nski,
    4. AnnaWi´sniewska, and
    5. EwaZawojska

    . 2017. “Addressing Empirical Challenges Related to the Incentive Compatibility of Stated Preferences Methods.”Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization142: 47–63.

    OpenUrl
11. ↵
    1. Flores, Nicholas E., and
    2. AaronStrong

    . 2007. “Cost Credibility and the Stated Preference Analysis of Public Goods.”Resource and Energy Economics29(3): 195–205.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
12. ↵
    1. Forbes, Keldi,
    2. PeterBoxall,
    3. Wiktor L.Adamowicz, and
    4. AlejandroDe Maio Sukic

    . 2015. “Recovering Pacific Rockfish at Risk: The Economic Valuation of Management Actions.”Frontiers in Marine Science2(71). https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2015.00071.
13. ↵
    1. Groothuis, Peter A.,
    2. Tanga M.Mohr,
    3. John C.Whitehead, and
    4. KristanCockerill

    . 2017. “Endogenous Consequentiality in Stated Preference Referendum Data: The Influence of the Randomly Assigned Tax Amount.”Land Economics93(2): 258–68.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
14. ↵
    1. He, Jie,
    2. JérômeDupras,
    3. FranckNdefo, and
    4. ThomasPoder

    . 2020. “Payment and Provision Consequentiality in Voluntary Contribution Mechanism: Separate or Joint Effects?”Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences13: 11–36.

    OpenUrl
15. ↵
    1. Herriges, Joseph,
    2. CatherineKling,
    3. Chih-ChenLiu, and
    4. JustinTobias

    . 2010. “What Are the Consequences of Consequentiality?”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management59(1): 67–81.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
16. ↵
    1. Hwang, Joonghyun,
    2. Daniel R.Petrolia, and
    3. Matthew G.Interis

    . 2014. “Consequentiality and Opt-Out Responses in Stated Preference Surveys.”Agricultural and Resource Economics Review43(3): 471–88.

    OpenUrl
17. ↵
    1. Interis, Matthew G., and
    2. Daniel R.Petrolia

    . 2014. “The Effects of Consequentiality in Binary-and Multinomial-Choice Surveys.”Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics39(2): 201–16.

    OpenUrl
18. ↵
    1. Johnston, Robert J.,
    2. Kevin J.Boyle,
    3. WiktorAdamowicz,
    4. JeffBennett,
    5. RoyBrouwer,
    6. Trudy A.Cameron,
    7. W. MichaelHanemann,
    8. NickHanley,
    9. MandyRyan,
    10. RicardoScarpa,
    11. RogerTourangeau, and
    12. Christian A.Vossler

    . 2017. “Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies.”Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists4(2): 319–405.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
19. ↵
    1. Li, Xiaogu,
    2. Kimberley L.Jensen,
    3. Dayton M.Lambert, and
    4. Christopher D.Clark

    . 2018. “Consequentiality Beliefs and Consumer Valuation of Extrinsic Attributes in Beef.”Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics50(1): 1–26.

    OpenUrl
20. ↵
    1. Lloyd-Smith, Patrick,
    2. WiktorAdamowicz, and
    3. DianeDupont

    . 2019. “Incorporating Stated Consequentiality Questions in Stated Preference Research.”Land Economics95(3): 293–306.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
21. ↵
    1. Lusher, Amy

    . 2015. “Microplastics in the Marine Environment: Distribution, Interactions, and Effects.”In Marine Anthropogenic Litter, edited by MelanieBergmann, LarsGutow, and MichaelKlages, 245–307. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
22. ↵
    1. Lusher, Amy L.,
    2. ValentinaTirelli,
    3. IanOConnor, and
    4. RickOfficer

    . 2015. “Microplastics in Arctic Polar Waters: The First Reported Values of Particles in Surface and Sub-Surface Samples.”Scientific Reports5(1): 14947.

    OpenUrl
23. ↵
    1. Mitani, Yohei, and
    2. Nicholas E.Flores

    . 2010. “Public Goods Referenda without Perfectly Correlated Prices and Quantities.”Paper presented at the 4th World Congress of Environmental and Resource Economists, Montreal, Canada, June28–July2.
24. ↵
    1. Mitani, Yohei, and
    2. Nicholas E.Flores

    . 2014. “Hypothetical Bias Reconsidered: Payment and Provision Uncertainties in a Threshold Provision Mechanism.”Environmental and Resource Economics59(3): 433–54.

    OpenUrl
25. ↵
    1. Needham, Katherine, and
    2. NickHanley

    . 2019. “Prior Knowledge, Familiarity and Stated Policy Consequentiality in Contingent Valuation.”Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy9(1): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2019.1611481.

    OpenUrl
26. ↵
    1. Oehlmann, Malte, and
    2. JürgenMeyerhoff

    . 2017. “Stated Preferences towards Renewable Energy Alternatives in Germany: Do the Consequentiality of the Survey and Trust in Institutions Matter?”Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy6(1): 1–16.

    OpenUrl
27. ↵
    1. Stafford, Richard, and
    2. Peter J. S.Jones

    . 2019“Viewpoint: Ocean Plastic Pollution: A Convenient but Distracting Truth?”Marine Policy103: 187–91.

    OpenUrl
28. ↵
    1. Trevail, Alice M.,
    2. Geir W.Gabrielsen,
    3. SusanneKühn, and
    4. Jan A.Van Franeker

    . 2015. “Elevated Levels of Ingested Plastic in a High Arctic Seabird, the Northern Fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis).”Polar Biology38(7): 975–81.

    OpenUrl
29. ↵
    1. Vossler, Christian A.,
    2. MauriceDoyon, and
    3. DanielRondeau

    . 2012. “Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments.”American Economic Journal: Microeconomics4(4): 145–71.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
30. ↵
    1. Vossler, Christian A., and
    2. J. ScottHolladay

    . 2018. “Alternative Value Elicitation Formats in Contingent Valuation: Mechanism Design and Convergent Validity.”Journal of Public Economics165: 133–45.

    OpenUrl
31. ↵
    1. Vossler, Christian A., and
    2. Sharon B.Watson

    . 2013. “Understanding the Consequences of Consequentiality: Testing the Validity of Stated Preferences in the Field.”Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization86: 137–47.

    OpenUrl
32. ↵
    1. Wilde, Joachim

    . 2000. “Identification of Multiple Equation Probit Models with Endogenous Dummy Regressors.”Economics Letters69(3): 309–12.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
33. ↵
    1. Zawojska, Ewa,
    2. AnnaBartczak, and
    3. MikołajCzajkowski

    . 2019. “Disentangling the Effects of Policy and Payment Consequentiality and Risk Attitudes on Stated Preferences.”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management93: 63–84.

    OpenUrl