<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><xml><records><record><source-app name="HighWire" version="7.x">Drupal-HighWire</source-app><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rekola, Mika</style></author></authors><secondary-authors></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Lexicographic Preferences in Contingent Valuation: A Theoretical Framework with Illustrations</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Land Economics</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2003</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2003-05-01 00:00:00</style></date></pub-dates></dates><pages><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">277-291</style></pages><doi><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10.2307/3146871</style></doi><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">79</style></volume><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><abstract><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This paper considers some implications of L*-ordering, an incommensurable preference model proposed in earlier CV literature. The structure and existence of inverse demand functions is shown to be a function of three elements, the relationship between goods and wants, WTA/WTP formats and the endowment of the good. In a many-to-many relationship uncompensated and even compensated inverse demand functions may exist, whereas a one-to-one relationship, implicitly assumed in earlier literature, does not necessarily produce either. An illustration is provided in support of the theoretical framework, especially the hypothesis that one-to-one relationship and high share of CV responses revealing lexicographic preferences are correlated. (JEL Q26)</style></abstract></record></records></xml>