Conjoint Analysis of Groundwater Protection Programs

Thomas H. Stevens, Christopher Barrett and Cleve E. Willis

Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 1997, vol. 26, issue 2, 229-236

Abstract: Three conjoint models—a traditional ratings model, a ratings difference specification, and a binary response model—were used to value groundwater protection program alternatives. The last, which is virtually identical to a dichotomous choice contingent valuation specification, produced the smallest value estimates. This suggests that the conjoint model is very sensitive to model specification and that traditional conjoint models may overestimate economic value because many respondents are not in the market for the commodity being valued.

Date: 1997
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (21)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/ ... type/journal_article link to article abstract page (text/html)

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: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cup:agrerw:v:26:y:1997:i:02:p:229-236_00

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Agricultural and Resource Economics Review from Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press, UPH, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8BS UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kirk Stebbing ().