A procedure to analyse the strategic outliers and the multiple motivations in a contingent valuation: a case study for a concrete policy purpose

Franco, Daniel and Luiselli, Luca (2013): A procedure to analyse the strategic outliers and the multiple motivations in a contingent valuation: a case study for a concrete policy purpose. Published in: International Journal of Social Economics No. 3 (2013): pp. 246-266.

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe a methodological approach to analyse the strategic outliers and the multiple motivations in a contingent valuation used for a real policy case study. Design/methodology/approach – The used approach rationalises the cross comparison of the overall different information levels obtained by the survey to outline a qualitative-quantitative pattern of the relations between the rationale and other motivations of preference behaviours. Findings – The paper found that no assumption or investigation tool used alone was sufficient to explain the respondents elicited preferences. The results confirm that those who are willing to pay also hold significant motives other than the rationale ones influencing their decisions. Research limitations/implications – The approach allows to reasonably rule the sharing-out of true zero values from “protest zeros” avoiding the risk of arbitrarily excluding valid data from the CV analyses. Practical implications – The approach may overpass the reasons behind the provision point mechanism; hence, the authors suggest to extend this procedure to divergent environmental contexts to verify the generality of the methodology. Originality/value – The adopted procedure shows that the use of monetary estimates of ecological services to support sustainable decision processes can be acceptable if coupled with the multiple motivations that hold them.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: WTP; Consequentiality; Contingent valuation; Attitudes; Outliers; Free-riders; Motivation (psychology).
• Subjects: Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q57 - Ecological Economics: Ecosystem Services ; Biodiversity Conservation ; Bioeconomics ; Industrial Ecology; Z - Other Special Topics > Z1 - Cultural Economics ; Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology > Z13 - Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology ; Social and Economic Stratification

References

Adams J. (1993). “The emperor’s old clothes: the curious comeback of cost benefit analysis”. Environmental Values. Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 247-260.

Ajzen, I. (1991). “The theory of planned behaviour”. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50, pp. 179–211.

Alberini A., Kanninen B., Carson R.T. (1997). “Modeling Response Incentives in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Data.” Land Economics, Vol. 73, pp. 309-324.

Alberini A, Cooper J. (2000). “Applications of contingent valuation methods in developing countries.” FAO Economic and Social Paper 146. FAO, Roma, Italy.

Anonymous, (1999). “SPSS for Windows, release 10.0.” SPSS, New York.

Arrow, K., Solow, R., Portney, P.R., Leamer, E.E., Radner, R. and Schuman, H. (1993). “Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation”. available at: http://www.darp.noaa.gov/library/pdf/cvblue.pdf.

Asciuto A., Fiandaca F., Schimmenti E. (2005). “Formati di domanda nella valutazione contingente.” Estimo e Territorio. Vol. 2, pp 9-21.

Bateman, I.J., Brouwer, R., Ferrini, S., Schaafsma, M., Barton, D.N., Dubgaard, A., Hasler, B., Hime, S., Liekens, I., Navrud, S., De Nocker, L., Ščeponavičiūté, R., and Seméniené, D. (2009). “Making benefit transfers work: Deriving and testing principles for value transfers for similar and dissimilar sites using a case study of the non-market benefits of water quality improvements across Europe.” CSERGE Working Paper EDM 09-10. available at: URL http://www.cserge.ac.uk/sites/default/files/edm_2009_10.pdf.

Buchli L. (2004). “Protest bids in CV studies: an analysis of WTP bids for a river flow enhancement”.Monte Verità Conference on Sustainable Resource Use and Economic Dynamics – SURED, June 7-10, 2004, Ascona,Switzerland, available at: http://www.cer.ethz.ch/sured_2004/programme/sured_buchli.pdf

Carson, R.T., Flores, N.E., and Meade, N.F. (2001). “Contingent valuation: controversies and evidence.” Environmental Resource Economics, Vol. 19, pp.173-210.

Clinch, J., and A. Murphy (2001). “Modelling Winners and Losers in Contingent Valuation of Public Goods: Appropriate Welfare Measures and Econometric Analysis.” Economic Journal, Vol. 111, No. 470, pp. 420–443.

Carson R.T., Groves T. (2007). “Incentive and informational properties of preference questions.” Environmental Resource Econnomis, Vol. 37, pp.181–210.

Cooper, T., Hart, K. and Baldock, D. (2009). Provision of Public Goods Through Agriculture in the European Union. Report for DG Agriculture and Rural Development, Institute for European Environmental Policy, London.

Costanza R., d’Arge R., de Groot R., Farber S., Grasso M., Hannon B., Limburg K., Naeem S., O’Neill R.V., Paruelo J., Raskin R.G., Sutton P., van den Belt M. (1997). “The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital.” Nature, Vol. 387, pp. 253-260.

Desvousges, W.H., V.K. Smith, A. Fisher (1983). “Estimates of the Option Values for Water Quality Improvements”, Economics Letters, Vol.13, No. 1, pp. 81–86.

Dilman D. (1991). “The design and administration of mail survyes”, in .R. Scott e J Blake (Ed.), Annual Review of Sociology, Palo Alto, California.

Franco D., Luiselli L., 2014. How much do the common goods of rural and semi-natural landscape cost? A case study. Planland Org. Working Paper, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4981.6801

Franco D., Luiselli L., 2014a. The shared knowledge behind the paying for rural ecosystem services: a case study, International Journal of Environmental Studies. DOI: 10.1080/00207233.2014.947727

Franco D., Luiselli L., 2014b. The perceived motives behind wetland values: a case study. Land Use Policy, 41: 526-532. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.04.007

Groothuis P. A., Whitehead J. C. (2009). “The Provision Point Mechanism and Scenario Rejection in Contingent Valuation”, Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Vol. 38, No, 2, pp. 271–280

Halstead J. M., Luloff A. E., Stevens T. H. (1992). “Protest bidders in contingent valuation”, Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Econonomics, Vol. 21, pp. 160-169.

Hanemann, W.M., Kanninen, B. (1999). “The statistical analysis of discrete-response CV data”, In: Bateman I. and Willis K. (Ed.), Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the US, EU, and Developing Countries., Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 302-441.

Hanley N., Wright R., Macmillan D., Philip L. (2001). “Willingness to pay for the conservation and management of wild geese in Scotland”, Technical Report B, Scottish Executive Central Research Unit.

Harrison G.W., Kristrom B. (1996). “On the Interpretation of Responses to Contingent Valuation Surveys”, in: Johanssonn P.O., Kristrom B., Maler K.G. (Ed), Current Issues in Environmental Economics, Manchester University Press, Manchester.

Jorgensen, B.S., Syme, G.J. (2000). “Protest response and willingness to pay: attitude toward paying for stormwater pollution abatement”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 33, pp. 251– 265.

Jakobsson, K.M. and Dragun, A.K. (2001). “The worth of a possum: valuing species with the contingent valuation method”, Environmental Resource Economics, Vol. 19, pp. 211-227.

Jorgensen B., Syme G., Bishop B., Nancarrow B. (1999), “Protest Responses in Contingent Valuation”, Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 131-150.

Kahneman, D. (2003). “A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality”, American Psychologist, Vol. 58, pp. 697–720.

Leschine,T. M., Wellman K.F., Green T.H. (1997), “The Economic Value of Wetlands: Wetlands’ Role in Flood Protection in Western Washington”, Publication No. 97-100, Washington Department of Ecology. Washington.

Lindhjema E., Navrudb S. (2011), «Are Internet surveys an alternative to face-to-face interviews in contingent valuation? », Ecological Economics, Vol. 70, No., pp.1628–1637.

Luiselli, L. (2006), ”Ecological modelling of convergence patterns between European and African ‘whip’ snakes”, Acta Oecologica, Vol. 30, pp. 62-68.

Meyerhoff, J. and Liebe, U. (2006), “Protest beliefs in contingent valuation: explaining their motivation”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 57, pp.583-594.

Meyerhoff, J. and Liebe, U. (2006a). “Status-Quo Effect in Choice Modeling: Protest Beliefs, Attitudes, and Task Complexity”, working Paper on Management in Environmental Planning 15/2006, Institute for Landscape and Environmental Planning, Technische Universität Berlin. available at: http://www.bahnsysteme.tu-berlin.de/fileadmin/a0731/uploads/publikationen/workingpapers/WP_15_Meyerhoff_Liebe_Status_quo_Effect_in_Choice_Experiments.pdf

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, (2003), Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment, Island Press, Washington.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis, World Resources Institute, Washington.

Milon J. W. (1989), “Contingent valuation experiments for strategic behaviour”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 17 (3): 293-308

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

Moser D., Dunning M. (1986), A Guide For Using the Contingent Valuation Methodology in Recreation Studies, National Economic Development Procedures Manual-Recreation, Vol. 2. IWR Report 86-R-5, U.S. Fort Belvoir, Virginia, Army Corps of Engineers.

Mullarkey D.J., Bishop R.C. (1999), “Sensitivity to scope: evidence from a CVM study of wetlands”, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 81, pp. 1313.

Oguz D. (2000), “User surveys of Ankara’s urban parks”, “Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 52, pp. 165-171.

Pagiola S., von Ritter K., Bishop J. (2004), “Assessing the economic value of ecosystem conservation”, Paper n. 101,The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Env. Dep., Washington D.C., available at: http://www.cbd.int/doc/case-studies/inc/cs-inc-iucn-nc-wb-en.pdf

Piano Territoriale Provinciale Generale PTPG, 2010. Supplemento ordinario n.45 "Bollettino Ufficiale della Regione Lazio" n.9 del 6 marzo 2010.

Poe, G.L., J.E. Clark, D. Rondeau, and W.D. Schulze (2002), “Provision Point Mechanisms and Field Validity Tests of Contingent Valuation”, Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol. 23, No., 4, pp. 105–131.

R Development Core Team (2008), “A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing”, available at: http://www.Rproject.org, (downloaded on January 2009).

Ryana A. M., Spash C. L. (2011), “WTP an attitudinal measure? Empirical analysis of the psychological explanation for contingent values”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 674–687

Römer A.U. (1992), “How to handle strategic and protest bids in contingent valuation studies. An application of two-steps Heckman procedure”, in International Conference of Econometrics of Europe 2000, Applied Econometrics Association, Brussels, pp. 311-317.

Rose, S.K., J. Clark, G.L. Poe, D. Rondeau, and W.D. Schulze (2002), “The Private Provision of Public Goods: Tests of a Provision Point Mechanism for Funding Green Power Programs”, Resource and Energy Economics, Vol. 24, No. 1/2, pp. 131–155.

Schläpfer F. (2007), “Contingent valuation: A new perspective”, Ecological Economics, Vol, 64, No.,4, pp. 729–740.

Spash C. L, Urama K., Burton R., Kenyon W., Shannon P., Hill G. (2009), “Motives behind willingness to pay for improving biodiversity in a water ecosystem: Economics, ethics and social psychology”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 68, pp. 955 – 964.

Spash, C.L. (2000), “Ecosystems, contingent valuation and ethics: the case of wetlands re-creation”, Ecological Economics Vol, 34, pp. 195–215.

StataCorp (2005) “Stata Statistical Software: Release 9”, College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.

Strazzera E., Genius M., Scarpa R., Hutchinson G. (2003), “The Effect of Protest Votes on the Estimates of Willingness to Pay for Use Values of Recreational Sites”, Environmental and Resource Economics, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 461-476.

TEEB (2009). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity for National and International Policy Makers – Summary: Responding to the Value of Nature, available at: http://www.teebweb.org/Portals/25/Documents/TEEB_D1%20summary%20FINAL%20DOC.pdf.

Tempesta T., Maragngon F. (2004), “Stima del valore economico totale dei paesaggi forestali italiani tramite valutazione contingente”, Genio Rurale, Vol. 11, pp. 32-45.

Tempesta T. (2007), “Aspetti percettivi e cognitivi nella valutazione del paesaggio”. in Marangon F (Ed.), Il paesaggio, un valore senza prezzo. Università Udinese, Udine.

Tolley, G. and Fabian, R. G. (1998) “Issues in improvement of the valuation of non market goods”, Resource and Energy Economics, Vol. 20, pp. 75-83.

Turner R. K., Paavola J., Cooper P., Farber S., Jessamy V., Georgiou S. (2003), “Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research directions”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 46, pp. 493-/510

Udziela M. K., Bennet L. L. (1997), “Contingent Valutation of an Urban salt Marsh Restoration, in David Casagrande (Ed), Restoration of an Urban salt marsh: an interdisciplinary approach, Bulletin number100, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, New Haven, CT.

Venkatachalam L. (2004) “The contingent valuation method: a review”, Environmental Impact Assessment Review. Vol. 24, pp. 89–124

Whitehead J. C., Clifford W. B., Hoban T. J. (2000), “WTP for Research and Extension Programs: Divergent Validity of Contingent Valuation with Single and Multiple Bound Valuation Questions”. Working Papers 0002, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.