Subjective perceptions about benefit and cost levels in contingent valuation

Julian J. Hwang

Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 2024, vol. 53, issue 3, 478-491

Abstract: This paper hypothesizes that respondents in contingent valuation surveys may form different benefit and cost levels that deviate from the levels specified by the researcher. The conceptual framework investigates potential biases based on the direction of deviations. Survey data on the restoration of wetlands in Tampa Bay show that a significant portion of the respondents deviate from the benefit and cost levels presented in the scenario. Empirical results indicate that willingness-to-pay (WTP) estimates are very sensitive to the perceived benefit and cost levels. Depending on the direction of the deviations, WTP estimates could fluctuate up to +61 percent and −82 percent, compared to the estimate from those who evaluate the scenario at the presented levels.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

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:53:y:2024:i:3:p:478-491_6

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 ().