Multiple bounded discrete choice contingent valuation: parametric and nonparametric welfare estimation and a comparison to the payment card

Vossler, Christian A. (2003): Multiple bounded discrete choice contingent valuation: parametric and nonparametric welfare estimation and a comparison to the payment card.

Abstract

In multiple bounded discrete choice (MBDC) surveys, respondents indicate how certain they would be to vote in favor of a policy at different prices by choosing, for example, among “definitely yes”, “probably yes”, “not sure”, “probably no”, and “definitely no” response options for each price. In estimating non-market values from MBDC data, past researchers have made markedly different assumptions with respect to the assumed correlation of within-respondent decisions (one for each price) and the correspondence of stated payment certainty to actual behavioral intentions. The first objective of this paper is to provide guidance for future research efforts by discriminating between existing models and proposing new estimators that relax some important statistical assumptions of existing models. Contrary to a previous study, results in this paper suggest that within-respondent decisions should be treated as being perfectly correlated. The second objective is to examine whether it is worthwhile to collect the additional information on payment certainty, as it may place additional cognitive burden on respondents as well as data analysts. Using data from previous studies, MBDC is compared with the payment card, a related elicitation approach that does not gauge payment certainty. This comparison provides strong and systematic evidence that “definitely yes” and “probably yes” MBDC respondents would vote “yes” while other respondents would vote “no” in the absence of the certainty categories.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: contingent valuation; discrete choice models; uncertainty
• Subjects: Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q51 - Valuation of Environmental Effects; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C2 - Single Equation Models ; Single Variables > C25 - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models ; Discrete Regressors ; Proportions ; Probabilities

References

Alberini, Anna. 1993. Optimal Designs and Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Surveys: Single Bound, Double-Bounded, and Bivariate Models. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 28(3): 287-306.

Alberini, Anna. 1995. Efficiency vs Bias of Willingness-to-Pay Estimates: Bivariate and Interval Data Models. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 29(2): 169-180.

Alberini, Anna, Kevin Boyle, and Michael Welsh. 2003. Analysis of Contingent Valuation Data with Multiple Bids and Response Options Allowing Respondents to Express Uncertainty. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 45(1): 40-62.

Alberini, Anna, Barbara Kanninen, and Richard T. Carson. 1997. Modeling Response Incentive Effects in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Data. Land Economics 73: 309-324.

Bateman, Ian J. Matthew Cole, Philip Cooper, Stavros Georgiou, David Hadley, and Gregory L. Poe. On Visible Choice Sets and Scope Sensitivity. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, in press.

Bateman, Ian J., Ian H. Langford, Andrew P. Jones, Geoffrey N. Kerr. 2001. Bound and Path Effects in Double and Triple Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation. Resource and Energy Economics 23(3): 191-213.

Butler, J. S. and Robert Moffit. 1982. A Computationally Efficient Quadrature Procedure for the One-Factor Multinomial Probit Model. Econometrica 50(3): 761-764.

Cameron, Trudy A. and D. D. Huppert 1989. OLS versus ML Estimation of Non-market Resource Values with Payment Card Interval Data. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 17: 230-246.

Cameron, Trudy A. and Michael D. James. 1987. Efficient Estimation Methods for ‘Closed-ended’ Contingent Valuation Surveys. The Review of Economics and Statistics 69: 269-276.

Cameron, Trudy A., Gregory L. Poe, Robert G. Ethier, and William D. Schulze. 2002. Alternative Nonmarket Value-Elicitation Methods: Are Revealed and Stated Preferences the Same? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 44(3): 391-425.

Cameron, Trudy A. and John Quiggin. 1994. Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data from a “Dichotomous Choice with Follow-up” Questionnaire. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 27: 218-234.

Carson, Richard T., Theodore Groves, and Mark J. Machina. 2000. Incentive and Information Properties of Preference Questions. Working paper, University of California, San Diego.

Carson, Richard T., W. Michael Hanemann, and Robert C. Mitchell. 1986. The Use of Simulated Political Markets to Value Public Goods. Working paper, University of California, San Diego.

Carson, Richard T., L. Wilks, and D. Imber. 1994. Valuing the Preservation of Australia’s Kakadu Conservation Zone. Oxford Economic Papers 46: 727-749.

Champ, Patricia A. and Thomas C. Brown. 1997. A Comparison of Contingent and Actual Voting Behavior. Proceedings from W-133 Benefits and Cost Transfer in Natural Resource Planning, 10th Interim Report.

Champ, Patricia A., Richard C. Bishop, Thomas C. Brown, and Daniel W. McCollum. 1997. Using Donation Mechanisms to Value Non-Use Benefits from Public Goods. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 33(2): 151-163.

Conover, W. J. 1980. Practical Nonparametric Statistics, 2nd Ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Evans, Mary F., Nicholas E. Flores, and Kevin J. Boyle. 2003. Multiple Bounded Uncertainty Choice Data as Probabilistic Intentions. Land Economics, forthcoming.

Greene, William H. 2002. Econometric Analysis, 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Haab, Timothy C. and Kenneth E. McConnell. 1997. Referendum Models and Negative Willingness to Pay: Alternative Solutions. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32(2): 251-270.

Hanemann, W. Michael, John Loomis, and Barbara Kanninen. 1991. Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 72: 1255-1263.

Herriges, Joseph A., and Jason F. Shogren. 1996. Starting Point Bias in Dichotomous Choice Valuation with Follow-Up Questioning. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30(1): 112-131.

Johanesson, M., Glenn C. Blomquist, Karen Blumenschein, Per-Olav Johansson, Bengt Liljas, and Richard M. O’Conor. 1999. Calibrating Hypothetical Willingness to Pay Responses. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 8:21-32.

Kanninen, Barbara J. 1995. Optimal Experimental Design for Double Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation. Land Economics 69: 138-146.

Krinsky, Itzhak, and A. Leslie Robb. 1986. On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities. Review of Economics and Statistics 68: 715-719.

Kriström, Bengt. 1990. A Non-Parametric Approach to the Estimation of Welfare Measures in Discrete Response Valuation Studies. Land Economics 66(2): 135-139.

Kriström, Bengt. 1997. Spike Models in Contingent Valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79(3): 1013-1023.

Li, Chuan-Zhong, and Leif Mattson. 1995. Discrete Choice under Preference Uncertainty: An Improved Structural Model for Contingent Valuation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 28: 256-269.

Maddala, G. S. 1987. Limited Dependent Variable Models Using Panel Data. Journal of Human Resources 22(3): 305-338.

Magelby, Daniel. 1989. Opinion Formation and Opinion Change in Ballot Proposition Campaigns, in Manipulating Public Opinion, ed. M. Margolis and G Mauser. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishers.

Mitchell, Robert C. and Richard T. Carson.1989. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future.

Opaluch, John J. and Kathleen Segerson. 1989. Rational Roots of 'Irrational' Behavior: New Theories of Economic Decision-Making. Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 18(2):81-95.

Poe, Gregory L., Jeremy R. Clark, Daniel Rondeau, and William D. Schulze. 2002. Provision Point Mechanisms and Field Validity Tests of Contingent Valuation. Environmental and Resource Economics 23(1): 105-131.

Poe, Gregory L., Eric K. Severance-Lossin, and Michael P. Welsh. 1994. Measuring the Difference (X-Y) of Simulated Distributions: A Convolutions Approach. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76(4): 904-915.

Poe, Gregory L., and Christian A. Vossler. 2002. Monte Carlo Benchmarks for Discrete Response Valuation Methods: Comment. Land Economics 78(4): 605-616.

Ready, Richard C., John C. Whitehead, and Glenn C. Blomquist. 1995. Contingent Valuation when Respondents are Ambivalent. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 29(2): 181-196.

Turnbull, Bruce W. 1974. Nonparametric Estimation of a Survivorship Function with Doubly Censored Data. Journal of the American Statistical Association 69(345): 169-173.

Turnbull, Bruce W. 1976. The Empirical Distribution Function with Arbitrarily Grouped, Censored and Truncated Data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society - Series B (Methodological) 38(3):290-295.

Vossler, Christian A. and Joe Kerkvliet. 2003. A Criterion Validity Test of the Contingent Valuation Method: Comparing Hypothetical and Actual Voting Behavior for a Public Referendum. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 45(3): 631-649.

Vossler, Christian A., Joe Kerkvliet, Stephen Polasky, and Olesya Gainutdinova. 2003a. Externally Validating Contingent Valuation: An Open-Space Survey and Referendum in Corvallis, Oregon. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 51(2): 261-277.

Vossler, Christian A., Gregory L. Poe, Robert G. Ethier, and Michael P. Welsh. 2003b. Payment Certainty in Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Responses: Results from a Field Validity Test. Southern Economic Journal 69(4): 886-902.

Vossler, Christian A., Gregory L. Poe, Michael P. Welsh, and Robert G. Ethier. 2003c. Assessing Bid Position Bias in Multiple Bounded Discrete Choice Valuation Questions. Unpublished Manuscript.

Wang, Hua. 1997. Treatment of “Don’t-Know” Responses in Contingent Valuation Surveys: A Random Valuation Model. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32(2): 219-232.

Welsh, Michael P., Richard C. Bishop, M. L. Phillips, and R. M. Baumgartner. 1995. GCES Non-Use Value Study: Final Report. Report to Glen Canyon Environmental Studies, U.D. Bureau of Reclamation, Hagler Bailly Consulting Inc., Madison, WI.

Welsh, Michael P. and Gregory L. Poe. 1998. Elicitation Effects in Contingent Valuation: Comparisons to a Multiple Bounded Discrete Choice Approach. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 36: 170-185.

White, H. 1982. Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Misspecified Models. Econometrica 53(1): 1-16.

Whitehead, John C. 2002. Incentive Incompatibility and Starting-Point Bias in Iterative Valuation Questions. Land Economics 78: 285-297.