Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?

Peter Diamond and Jerry Hausman

Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1994, vol. 8, issue 4, 45-64

Abstract: Without market outcomes for comparison, internal consistency tests, particularly adding-up tests, are needed for credibility. When tested, contingent valuation has failed. Proponents find surveys tested poorly done. To the authors' knowledge, no survey has passed these tests. The 'embedding effect' is the similarity of willingness-to-pay responses that theory suggests (and sometimes requires) be different. This problem has long been recognized but not solved. The authors conclude that current methods are not suitable for damage assessment or benefit-cost analysis. They believe the problems come from an absence of preferences, not a flaw in survey methodology, making improvement unlikely.

JEL-codes: Q26 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1994
Note: DOI: 10.1257/jep.8.4.45
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (827)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/jep.8.4.45 (application/pdf)

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:aea:jecper:v:8:y:1994:i:4:p:45-64

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.aeaweb.org/journals/subscriptions

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Economic Perspectives is currently edited by Enrico Moretti

More articles in Journal of Economic Perspectives from American Economic Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Michael P. Albert ().