LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
MacMillan, Douglas C.; Philip, Lorna; Hanley, Nick; Alvarez-Farizo, Begona (2002)
Publisher: Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam.
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: GE
Wild geese graze on improved pastures and young cereal crops and hence can cause considerable damage to agriculture, particularly in areas close to roosting sites. This study uses contingent valuation (CV) to establish whether government compensation payments currently made to farmers represent 'value for money' by estimating the value placed on goose conservation by the general public. Benefit estimates from a conventional interview approach are compared with a group-based approach, called the 'Market Stall (MS)'. This involves two 1 h meetings held 1 week apart and differs from conventional interviews in that participants are given more time to consider their preferences and to discuss their WTP question with other household members. We argue that this type of group-based approach to environmental valuation offers important advantages over individual interview approaches, especially for unfamiliar and/or complex environmental goods.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Ajzen, I., Brown, T.C., Rosenthal, L.H., 1996. Information bias in contingent valuation: effects of personal relevance, ning (R.B. Rettig, Comp.). Western Regional Research Report, Department of Agriculture and Resource Economics, Oregon State University, Corvallis.
    • Hanemann, W.M., 1994. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. Journal of Economic Perspectives 3, 1 /23.
    • Harrison, G.W., Lesley, J.C., 1996. Must contingent valuation surveys cost so much. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 31, 79 /95.
    • Isenberg, D.J., 1986. Group polarisation: a critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50 (6), 1141 /1151.
    • Kealy, M.J., Montgomery, M., Dovidio, J.F., 1990. Reliability and predictive validity of contingent values: does the nature of the good matter. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 19, 244 /263.
    • Kenyon, W., Hanley, N., 2001. Economic and Participatory Approaches to Environmental Evaluation. Discussion Paper 00-15, Economics Department, University of Glasgow.
    • Kenyon, W., Hanley, N., Nevin, C., 2001. Citizen juries as an aid to environmental valuation. Environment and Planning C 19 (4), 557 /566.
    • Loomis, J.B., 1990. Comparative reliability of the dichotomous choice and open-ended contingent valuation techniques. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 18, 78 /85.
    • Munro, A., Hanley, N., 1999. Information, uncertainty and contingent valuation. In: Bateman, I., Willis, K. (Eds.), Contingent Valuation of Environmental Preferences. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
    • Navrud, S., Veisten, K., 1996. Validity of Nonuse Values in Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Test with Real Payments. Paper presented to the Seventh EAERE Conference, Lisbon.
    • NOAA, 1993. Natural Resource Damage Assessments: Proposed Rules. Federal Register 59 (5), 1062 /1191.
    • Stephenson, K., Taylor, D.B., 1988. The influence of information on mail contingent valuation surveys. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 70 (5), 1199 /1204.
    • Welsh, M., Poe, G.L., 1998. Elicitation effects in contingent valuation: comparisons to a multiple-bounded discrete choice approach. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 34, 219 /232.
    • Whittington, D., Smith, V.K., Okorafor, A., Okore, A., Liu, J.L., McPhail, A., 1992. Giving respondents time to think in contingent valuation studies: a developing country example. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 22, 205 /225.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article