Preference Elicitation Methods and Valuation Implications: Experimental Evidence from Valuation and Purchase of Water Quality Credits
Pengfei Liu () and
Stephen Swallow ()
No 236209, 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts from Agricultural and Applied Economics Association
This paper compares different preference elicitation methods used in choice ex- periments. We implemented four different methods to elicit individuals’ preference for a non-market good. Our four treatments include (1) a hypothetical referen- dum, (2) a real referendum lacking incentive compatibility, (3) a real choice with incentive compatibility and (4) a hybrid approach that combines (2) and (3). We develop a method to estimate the percentage of strategic choices in each treatment. We find that in the hypothetical referendum, about 75% to 92% individuals truth- fully reveal their preference and choose the option that gives the highest utility in a choice question. Adding policy consequentiality (e.g., the real referendum) and payment consequentiality (e.g., the hybrid approach) could increase the percentage of individuals truthfully reveal their preference.
Keywords: Environmental Economics and Policy; Institutional and Behavioral Economics; Land Economics/Use; Public Economics; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-env, nep-exp and nep-upt
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/236209/files/L ... licitationMethod.pdf (application/pdf)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:aaea16:236209
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts from Agricultural and Applied Economics Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().