SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Alam, M. K., and D. Marinova (2003), Measuring the total value of a river cleanup, Water Sci. Technol., 48(7), 149156.
  • Arrow, K., R. Solow, E. Leamer, R. Radner, and H. Schuman (1993), Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation, Federal Register, 58(10), 46014614.
  • Bateman, I. J., A. Munro, B. Rhodes, C. Starmer, and R. Sugden (1997), Does part-whole bias exist? An experimental investigation, Economic J., 107(441), 322332.
  • Bateman, I. J., et al. (2002), Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual, 458 pp., Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, U.K.
  • Bateman, I. J., B. Day, S. Georgiou, and I. Lake (2006), The aggregation of environmental benefit values: Welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP, Ecol. Econ., 60(2), 450460.
  • Bateman, I. J., et al. (2011), 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, Environ. Resour. Econ., 50(3), 365387, doi:10.1007/s10640-011-9476-8.
  • Braga, J., and C. Starmer (2005), Preference anomalies, preference elicitation and the discovered preference hypothesis, Environ. Resour. Econ., 32, 5589.
  • Brouwer, R. (2008), The potential role of stated preference methods in the Water Framework Directive to assess disproportionate costs, J. Environ. Plan. Manage., 51(5), 597614.
  • Cameron, T. A., and D. D. Huppert (1989), OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values wth payment card data interval data, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 17(3), 230246.
  • Cameron, T. A., and, D. D. Huppert (1991), Referendum contingent valuation estimates: Sensitivity to the assignment of ordered values, J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 86(416), 910918.
  • Cameron, T. A., G. L. Poe, R. G. Ethier, and W. D. Schulze (2002), Alternative non-market value-elicitation methods: Are the underlying preferences the same?, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 44(3), 391425.
  • Carlsson, F., and P. Martinsson (2001), Do hypothetical and actual marginal willingness to pay differ in choice experiments?: Application to the valuation of the environment, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 41(2), 179192.
  • Carson, R. T., and T. Groves (2007), Incentive and informational properties of preference questions, Environ. Resour. Econ., 37(1), 181210.
  • Carson, R. T., and T. Groves (2011), Incentive and informational properties of preference questions: Commentary and extensions, in International Handbook of Non-Market Environmental Valuation, edited by J. Bennett, ch. 15, pp. 300321, Edward Elgar, Northampton, Mass.
  • Carson, R. T., and W. M. Hanemann (2005), Contingent valuation, in Handbook of Enviromental Economics, edited by K. M. Maler and J. R. Vincent, pp. 822920, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
  • Carson, R. T., and R. C. Mitchell (1993), The value of clean water: The publics willingness-to-pay for boatable, fishable, and swimmable quality water, Water Resour. Res., 29(7), 24452454.
  • Day, B. H., I. J. Bateman, R. T. Carson, D. Dupont, J. J. Louviere, S. Morimoto, R. Scarpa, and P. Wang (2012), Ordering effects and choice set awareness in repeat-response stated preference studies, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 63, 7391, doi:10.1016/j.jeem.2011.09.001.
  • Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) (2008), Overall Impact assessment for the Water Framework Directive (EC 2000/60/EC), Rep., U.K., 65 pp., [Available at http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/water/wfd/documents/RIA-river-basin.pdf.]
  • European Parliament (2000), Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action, Official J. European Communities, L327, 172.
  • Flores, N. E., and R. T. Carson (1997), The relationship between income elasticities of demand and willingness to pay, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 33(3), 287295.
  • Foster, V., and S. Mourato (2003), Elicitation format and sensitivity to scope: Do contingent valuation and choice experiments give the same results?, Environ. Resour. Econ., 24141160.
  • Green, D., K. E. Jacowitz, D. Kahneman, and D. McFadden (1998), Referendum contingent valuation, anchoring, and willingness to pay for public goods, Resour. Energy Econ., 20(2), 85116.
  • Hanley, N., R. E. Wright, and W. L. Adamowicz (1998), Using choice experiments to value the environment: Design issues, current experience and future prospects, Environ. Resour. Econ., 11(3–4), 413428.
  • Hanley, N., D. Bell, and B. Alvarez-Farizo (2003), Valuing the benefits of coastal water quality improvements using contingent and real behaviour, Environ. Resour. Econ., 24, 273285.
  • Hanley, N., R. E. Wright, and B. Alvarez-Farizo (2006), Estimating the economic value of improvements in river ecology using choice experiments: An application to the water framework directive, J. Environ. Manage., 78(2), 183193.
  • Hartman, R. S., M. J. Doane, and C. Woo (1991), Consumer rationality and the status quo, Q. J. Econ., 106(1), 141162.
  • Hoehn, J. P. (1991), Valuing the multidimensional impacts of environmental: Policy, theory and methods, Am. J. Agric. Econ., 73(2), 289299.
  • Hoehn, J. P., and A. Randall (1989), Too many proposals pass the benefit cost test, Am. Econ. Rev., 79(3), 544551.
  • Jacowitz, K. E., and D. Kahneman (1995), Measures of anchoring in estimation tasks, Personality Social Psychol. Bull., 21(11), 11611166.
  • Johnson, E. J., and D. A. Schkade (1989), Bias in utility assessments: Further evidence and explanations, Manage. Science, 35(4), 406424.
  • Johnson, R. J. (2006), Is hypothetical bias universial?: Validating contingent valuation responses with a binding referendum, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 52(1), 469481.
  • Kahneman, D., A. B. Krueger, D. Schkade, N. Schwarz, and A. A. Stone (2006), Would you be happier if you were richer? A focusing illusion, Science, 312(5782), 19081910.
  • Kontogianni, A., I. H. Langford, A. Papandreou, and M. S. Skourtos (2003), Social preferences for improving water quality: An economic analysis of benefits from wastewater treatment, Water Resour. Manage., 17(5), 317336.
  • Kramer, R. A., and J. I. Eisen-Hecht (2002), Estimating the economic value of water quality protection in the Catawba River basin, Water Resour. Res., 38(9), 1182, doi:10.1029/2001WR000755.
  • Loomis, J., P. Kent, L. Strange, K. Fausch, and A. Covich (2000), Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: Results from a contingent valuation survey, Ecol. Econ., 33(1), 103117.
  • Louviere, J. J., D. A. Hensher, and J. Swait (2000), Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application, Cambridge Univ. Press, N. Y., 402 pp.
  • Lusk, J. L., and T. C. Schroeder (2004), Are choice experiments incentive compatible? A test with quality differentiated beefsteaks, Am. J. Agric. Econ., 86, 467482.
    Direct Link:
  • McFadden, D. (1973), Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior, in Frontiers in Econometrics, edited by P. Zarembka, pp. 105142, Academic, N.Y.
  • 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., 463 pp.
  • NERA-Accent (2007), The benefits of Water Framework Directive programmes of measures in England and Wales, Rep. CRP 4b/c, Dept. for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, U.K.
  • Plott, C. R. (1996), Rational individual behavior in markets and social choice processes: The discovered preference hypothesis, in Rational Foundations of Economic Behavior, edited by K. Arrow, M. Perleman, and C. Schmidt, pp. 225250, Macmillan, London, U.K.
  • Rose, J. M., M. C. A. Bliemer, D. A. Hensher, and A. T. Collins (2008), Designing efficient stated preference experiments in the presence of reference alternatives, Trans. Res. B, 42(4), 395406.
  • Schkade, D. A., and D. Kahneman (1998), Does living in California make people happy? A focusing illusion in judgments of life satisfaction, Psychological Science, 9(5), 340346.
    Direct Link:
  • Turnbull, B. W. (1976), The empirical distribution function with arbitrarily grouped, censored, and truncated data, J. R. Stat. Soc., 38, 290295.
  • Venkatachalam, L. (2004), The contingent valuation method: A review, Environ. Impact Assess. Rev., 24(1), 89124.
  • Vossler, C., and J. Kerkvliet (2003), A criterion validity test of the contingent valuation method: Comparing hypothetical and actual voting behavior for a public referendum, J. Environ. Econ. Manag., 45(3), 631649.
  • Welsh, M. P., and G. L. Poe (1998), Elicitation effects in contingent valuation: Comparisons to a multiple bounded discrete choice approach, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 36(2), 170185.