A Comparison of Contingent Preference Models

John Mackenzie

American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1993, vol. 75, issue 3, 593-603

Abstract: I compare the informational efficiencies of contingent rating, contingent ranking, and two contingent paired-comparison methods as alternatives to the referendum contingent valuation method. The contingent rating method is hypothesized to be most efficient because ratings convey information on preference intensities and can uniquely represent respondent indifference or ambivalence. Survey data on hunters' ratings of alternative hypothetical hunting trips are used to estimate four alternative indirect utility models from which marginal willingness-to-pay measures for individual trip attributes are derived. Model comparison, WTP estimates, and their confidence intervals confirm the relative efficiency of the contingent rating approach.

Date: 1993
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (55)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1243566 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:oup:ajagec:v:75:y:1993:i:3:p:593-603.

Access Statistics for this article

American Journal of Agricultural Economics is currently edited by Madhu Khanna, Brian E. Roe, James Vercammen and JunJie Wu

More articles in American Journal of Agricultural Economics from Agricultural and Applied Economics Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().