Permanent URL to this publication: http://dx.doi.org/10.5167/uzh-2079
Schläpfer, Felix; Bräuer, Ingo (2007). Theoretical incentive properties of contingent valuation questions: Do they matter in the field? Ecological Economics, 62(3-4):451-460.
View at publisher
Green et al. (1998) [Green, D., Jacowitz, K.E., Kahneman, D., McFadden, D., 1998. Referendum contigent valuation, anchoring, and willingness to pay for public goods. Resource and Energy Economics 20 (2), 85-116] show theoretically that stated preference questions about public services can be framed in such ways that if the subjects accept the frame the payoffmaximizing behavior will be to answer truthfully. One key element of such a theoretically incentivecompatible framing is that the (hypothetical) decision rule specified in the survey instrument is understood to be a majority rule rather than the efficiency rule typically used in costbenefit analysis. We conducted field experiments in Germany and Switzerland to test if a referendum framing as suggested by Green et al. is effective in reducing strategic misrepresentation in a contingent valuation setting. We did not find the expected effects of the framing treatments on stated willingness to pay or on individuals' (stated) beliefs about the social choice context. The results do not support hopes that a theoretically incentive compatible framing could be purposefully used to invoke the specific beliefs about the linkage between responses and policy implementation that would make stated preference questions incentive compatible.
41 downloads since deposited on 11 Feb 2008
10 downloads since 12 months
|Item Type:||Journal Article, refereed, original work|
|Communities & Collections:||07 Faculty of Science > Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies|
|DDC:||570 Life sciences; biology
590 Animals (Zoology)
|Uncontrolled Keywords:||contingent valuation, incentives, public goods, stated preferences|
|Deposited On:||11 Feb 2008 12:27|
|Last Modified:||28 Nov 2013 00:47|
Users (please log in): suggest update or correction for this item
Repository Staff Only: item control page