Do CVM Welfare Estimates Suffer from On-Site Sampling Bias? A Comparison of On-Site and Household Visitor Surveys

Juan Marcos González-Sepúlveda and John B. Loomis

Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 2010, vol. 39, issue 3, 561-570

Abstract: The problem of endogenous stratification associated with on-site sampling has been overlooked in the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM). We find that using on-site samples of visitors overstates visitor willingness to pay (WTP) estimates relative to a household sample of visitors, and substantially overstates the unconditional population values. We provide two methods of correcting WTP of on-site samples. The uncorrected on-site sample CVM yields WTP of $132 per trip, while visitor WTP obtained from a random sample of households had a value of $66 per trip. Adaptation of choice-based sampling correction estimator to the on-site CVM data yields $73 per trip, not statistically different from the visitor value from the household survey, but significantly different from the uncorrected on-site sample value.

Date: 2010
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

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:39:y:2010:i:03:p:561-570_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 ().