Show simple item record

contributor authorGreg Lindsey
date accessioned2017-05-08T21:06:59Z
date available2017-05-08T21:06:59Z
date copyrightJanuary 1994
date issued1994
identifier other%28asce%290733-9496%281994%29120%3A1%28121%29.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/39246
description abstractResponses to willingness‐to‐pay questions in contingent valuation (CV) surveys are being used with increasing frequency to obtain estimates of the value of public goods, such as improved water quality, for use in benefit‐cost analyses. Analysts must decide whether the appropriate conceptual model for any particular application is a private or a political market. When estimating willingness‐to‐pay and total benefits, analysts must decide whether to censor outliers and certain zero responses, called protest bids, from data sets. Issues associated with identification of protest bids are reviewed, and alternate methods for the treatment of outliers are discussed. The significance of these methodological decisions is illustrated with an example involving willingness to pay for new storm water programs in Baltimore County, Md. to help achieve Chesapeake Bay nutrient‐reduction objectives. It is argued that decisions concerning analysis of troublesome responses should be consistent with the choice of market model for the application.
publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
titleMarket Models, Protest Bids, and Outliers in Contingent Valuation
typeJournal Paper
journal volume120
journal issue1
journal titleJournal of Water Resources Planning and Management
identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(1994)120:1(121)
treeJournal of Water Resources Planning and Management:;1994:;Volume ( 120 ):;issue: 001
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record