Contingent Valuation Method CVM - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 12
About This Presentation
Title:

Contingent Valuation Method CVM

Description:

Referendum choice: Are you willing to pay X? for different X, to many people ... For public goods, referenda and taxes are perhaps best; for (quasi-)private ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:779
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 13
Provided by: Esch3
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Contingent Valuation Method CVM


1
Contingent Valuation Method (CVM)
  • is a direct method in that it involves asking a
    sample of the relevant population question about
    their WTP or WTAC.
  • 'Contingent Valuation', because valuation is
    contingent on the hypothetical scenario put to
    respondents.
  • Advantages1) it can deal with both use and
    non-use values2) by answering WTP and WTAC
    questions it directly goes to the theoretically
    correct monetary measures of utility changes.

2
Contingent Valuation STEPS
  • 1) Creating a survey instrument for the
    elicitation of individuals' WTP/WTAC. (a)
    designing the hypothetical scenario (b)
    deciding whether to ask about WTP or WTAC, (c)
    creating a scenario about the means of payment or
    compensation.
  • 2) Using the survey instrument with a sample of
    the population of interest.

3
Contingent Valuation STEPS -2
  • 3) Analysing the responses to the survey. (a)
    using the sample data WTP/WTAC to estimate
    average WTP/WTAC for the population, (b)
    assessing the survey results so as to judge
    the accuracy of this estimate.
  • 4) Computing total WTP/WATC for the population of
    interest for use in a CBA.
  • 5) Conducting sensitivity analysis.

4
Contingent Valuation
  • Revealed preference methods (TCM, Hedonic Prices)
    can only estimate the use value of the
    environment, and only if that value affects
    behaviour in a measurable and interpretable
    manner
  • For the rest, we have to use either hypothetical
    markets or experimental markets (together
    constructed)
  • Experimental markets have delivered little
    estimates (but a lot of insights), so the
    contingent valuation method remains this is a
    stated preference method.

5
Example
  • A Interviewer introduction
  • B Background
  • 1. Opinion about current tap water quality
  • 2. Measures to improve water quality
  • C Value of water quality
  • Describe major pollution accident in 1991
  • If no action, how likely is a repetition?
  • Describe pollution prevention system
  • How much are you willing to pay?
  • D Socio-economic characteristics

6
Define market scenario
  • What is being valued? A day at the beach, a view
    of the beach? Pollution of a single beach, or all
    beaches?
  • What is being valued, a policy intervention or a
    change in pollution these have to be plausible
    and comprehensible
  • What is the payment vehicle? A tax, an entrance
    fee, a levy on parking note that people have
    opinions on these.

7
Choose elicitation method
  • Direct question How much are you willing to pay?
  • Bidding game Are you willing to pay X? If yes,
    Xd? If no, X-d?
  • Payment card Choose from a list of numbers,
    including comparisons
  • Referendum choice Are you willing to pay X? for
    different X, to many people
  • (Note we are looking for the maximum amount of
    WTP, or the minimum of WTAC)

8
Administration Sample
  • Mail No feedback or clarification possible
  • Telephone Has to be simple and short, no
    graphical material
  • In-person Expensive, interviewer bias
  • Are the people approached a representative
    sample? And those who answered? Does the survey
    itself induce a bias, for example, in knowledge?

9
Experiment Estimation
  • If one hypothesizes a relationship between WTP
    and income, then the suggested values (payment
    card, bidding game, referendum) have to be
    independent of income
  • If one hypothesizes a relationship between WTP
    and political colour, then one should include a
    question about the interviewees political
    opinions
  • But sample sizes need to be small, and interviews
    short!

10
Validity
  • Content (face) validity Does what is measured
    and what is supposed to be measured coincide?
  • Criterion validity Do the measured values
    correspond to other measurements of the same
    thing?
  • Construct/convergent validity Do the measured
    values correlate to measurements of similar
    things?
  • Construct/theoretical validity Do the
    measurements correspond to predictions?

11
Reliability
  • The more familiar people are with the good and
    the scale, the more reliable the measured values
  • For public goods, referenda and taxes are perhaps
    best for (quasi-)private goods, individual
    questions and entrance fee may be better
  • The payment vehicle may distort the measure.
  • Payment cards and perhaps bidding games give the
    most reliable results

12
Potential Biases
  • Incentive
  • Strategic
  • Compliance
  • Implied value
  • Starting point
  • Range
  • Relational
  • Importance
  • Position
  • Misspecification
  • Theoretical
  • Amenity
  • Context
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com