Abstract
The payment vehicle is a crucial element inapplications of the contingent valuation methodbecause it provides the context for payment. However,in many countries a relative unfamiliarity with theuse of tax levies and referenda can affect theplausibility of payment vehicles and lead to paymentvehicle bias. The most commonly used approach fordetermining whether payment bias exists is to usetests of convergent validity. It is demonstrated thatsimple tests of convergent validity can be ineffectivein diagnosing the existence of payment vehicle bias.Payment vehicle bias is found to occur because ofdifferences in the coverage of payment vehicles anddoubts about payment being one-off. When respondentsare found to be protesting against a particularpayment vehicle, the current state of the art approachis to delete them from the sample. In this paper analternative approach that relies on the recoding ofprotest responses is proposed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Blamey, R. K. (1995), Consumers and Contingent Valuation: An Investigation into Respondent Behaviour. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Canberra: Australian National University.
Brookshire, D. S., A. Randall and J. R. Stoll (1980), ‘Valuing Increments and Decrements in Natural Resource Service Flows’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 62, 478-488.
Cummings, R. G., D. S. Brookshire and W. D. Schulze (1986), Valuing Environmental Goods: An Assessment of the Contingent Valuation Method. Totowa: Rowman and Allanheld.
Daubert, J. T. and R. A. Young (1981), ‘Recreational Demands for Maintaining Instream Flows: A Contingent Valuation Approach’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 63, 667-676.
Dillman, D. A. (1978), Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. New York: Wiley-Interscience Publication, John Wiley and Sons.
Greenley, D. A., R. G. Walsh and R. A. Young (1982), ‘Option Value: Empirical Evidence from a Case Study of Recreation and Water Quality’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 100, 657-673.
Hayes, K. M., T. J. Tyrrell and G. Anderson (1992), ‘Estimating the Benefits of Water Quality Improvements in the Upper Narragansett Bay’, Marine Resource Economics 7, 75-85.
Loomis, J., M. Lockwood and T. DeLacy (1993), ‘Some Empirical Evidence on Embedding Effects in Contingent Valuation of Forest Protection’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 24, 45-55.
Mitchell, R. C. and R. T. Carson (1989), Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington DC: Resources for the Future.
Navrud, S. and G. J. Pruckner (1997), ‘Environmental Valuation — To Use or Not to Use? A Comparative Study of the United States and Europe’, Environmental and Resource Economics 10, 1-26.
Portney, P. R. (1994), ‘The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 8, 3-17.
Rowe, R. D., R. C. d'Arge and D. S. Brookshire (1980), ‘An Experiment on the Economic Value of Visibility’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 7, 1-19.
Stevens, T. H., N. E. DeCoteau and C. E. Willis (1997), ‘Sensitivity of Contingent Valuation to Alternative Payment Schedules’, Land Economics 73, 140-148.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Morrison, M.D., Blamey, R.K. & Bennett, J.W. Minimising Payment Vehicle Bias in Contingent Valuation Studies. Environmental and Resource Economics 16, 407–422 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008368611972
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008368611972