A Comparison of Value Elicitation Question Formats in Multiple-Good Contingent Valuation
A Comparison of Value Elicitation Question Formats in Multiple-Good Contingent Valuation作者机构：Department of Applied Economics National University of Kaohsiung Kaohsiung 81148Taiwan China Department of Economics Iowa State University Ames IA 50011 USA Department of Agribusiness Economics Southern Illinois University Carbondale IL 62901USA School of Natural Resources and Environment University of Michigan Ann Arbor M148103USA Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics University of Wisconsin Madison WI53706 USA
出 版 物：《Frontiers of Economics in China-Selected Publications from Chinese Universities》 (中国高等学校学术文摘·经济学（英文版）)
年 卷 期：2014年第9卷第1期
页 面：85-108页
学科分类：01[哲学] 0101[哲学-哲学] 070801[理学-固体地球物理学] 07[理学] 08[工学] 0708[理学-地球物理学] 0816[工学-测绘科学与技术] 010108[哲学-科学技术哲学]
主 题：stated preference choice experiment dichotomous choice,incentive compatibility multinomial choice
摘 要：This paper provides a convergent validity test of two types of multinomial choice questions vis-a-vis a dichotomous choice question by formally testing whether these stated preference elicitation question formats provide comparable welfare estimates. In particular, a dichotomous choice question, a traditional multinomial choice question, and a modified multinomial choice question suggested by Carson and Groves （2007） were applied in split samples to assess the influence of the informational and incentive properties on the respondents＇ annual willingness to accept compensation for adopting costly conservation practices in agriculture that benefit the environment. Our findings suggest that the two multinomial choice question formats elicit a similar mean willingness to accept distributions, but they are both different from a standarddichotomous choice question. Further, the willingness to accept distributions derived from the multinomial choice question formats are more dispersed than those from the dichotomous choice question.
维普期刊数据库