Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T07:27:14.080Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Protest Adjustments in the Valuation of Watershed Restoration Using Payment Card Data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Alan R. Collins  and
Randall S. Rosenberger
Alan R. Collins
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at West Virginia University in Morgantown
Randall S. Rosenberger
Affiliation:
Department of Forest Resources at Oregon State University in Corvallis
Get access

Abstract

When using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) format in contingent valuation (CV) to value watershed restoration, respondents may protest by questioning why they should pay to clean up a pollution problem that someone else created. Using a sample selection interval data model based on Bhat (1994) and Brox, Kumar, and Stollery (2003), we found that the decision to protest and WTP values were correlated. Protest sample selection bias resulted in a 300 percent overestimate of mean WTP per respondent. Using different ad hoc treatments of protesters, protest bias resulted in moderate effects (−10 percent to +14 percent) after controlling for sample selection bias.

Keywords

contingent valuationprotest biaswatershed restorationsample selectiongrouped Tobit
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 36 , Issue 2 , October 2007 , pp. 321 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arrow, K., Solow, R., Portney, P., Leaner, E., Radner, R., and Schuman, H. 1993. “Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation.” Federal Register 58: 4602–4614.Google Scholar
Bergstrom, J.C., Boyle, K.J., and Poe, G.L. (eds.). 2001. The Economic Value of Water Quality. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Bhat, C.R. 1994. “Imputing a Continuous Income Variable from Grouped and Missing Income Observations.” Economic Letters 46(4): 311–319.Google Scholar
Botelho, A., and Pinto, L.C. 2002. “Hypothetical, Real, and Predicted Real Willingness to Pay in Open-Ended Surveys: Experimental Results.” Applied Economics Letters 9(15): 993–996.Google Scholar
Boyle, K. 2001. “Contingent Valuation in Practice.” In Bergstrom, J.C., Boyle, K.J., and Poe, G.L., eds., The Economic Value of Water Quality. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Brookshire, D.S., and Coursey, D.L. 1987. “Measuring the Value of a Public Good: An Empirical Comparison of Elicitation Procedures.” American Economic Review 77(4): 554–566.Google Scholar
Brown, T.C., Champ, P.A., Bishop, R.C., and McCollum, D.W. 1996. “Which Response Format Reveals the Truth about Donations to a Public Good?” Land Economics 72(2): 152–166.Google Scholar
Brox, J.A., Kumar, R.C., and Stollery, K. 2003. “Estimating Willingness to Pay for Improved Water Quality in the Presence of Item Nonresponse Bias.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85(2): 414–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, T.A., and Huppert, D.D. 1989. “OLS versus ML Estimation of Non-Market Resource Values with Payment Card Interval Data.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 17(3): 230–246.Google Scholar
Cameron, T.A., Shaw, W.D., and Ragland, S.R. 1999. “Nonresponse Bias in Mail Survey Data: Salience vs. Endogenous Survey Complexity.” In Herriges, J.A. and Kling, C.L., eds., Valuing Recreation and the Environment Revealed Preference Methods in Theory and Practice. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Carson, R.T., Flores, N.E., and Meade, N.F. 2001. “Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence.” Environmental and Resource Economics 19(2): 173–210.Google Scholar
Carson, R.T., and Mitchell, R.C. 1993. “The Value of Clean Water: The Public's Willingness to Pay for Boatable, Fishable, and Swimmable Quality Water.” Water Resources Research 29(7): 2445–2454.Google Scholar
Collins, A., Rosenberger, R., and Fletcher, J. 2005. “The Economic Value of Stream Restoration.” Water Resources Research 41 (W02017, doi: 10.1029/2004WR003353).Google Scholar
Desvousges, W.H., Smith, V.K., and Fisher, A. 1987. “Option Price Estimates for Water Quality Improvements: A Contingent Valuation Study for the Monongahela River.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 14(3): 248–267.Google Scholar
Epp, D.J., and Delavan, W. 2001. “Measuring the Value of Protecting Ground Water Quality from Nitrate Contamination in Southeastern Pennsylvania.” In Bergstrom, J.C., Boyle, K.J., and Poe, G.L., eds., The Economic Value of Water Quality. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Farber, S., and Griner, B. 2000. “Valuing Watershed Quality Improvements Using Conjoint Analysis.” Ecological Economics 34(1): 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, A.M. 2003. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values (2nd edition). Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H. 2002. LIMDEP Version 8.0. Econometric software, Plainview, NY.Google Scholar
Halstead, J.M., Luloff, A.E., and Stevens, T.H. 1992. “Protest Bidders in Contingent Valuation.” Northeastern Journal of Agricultural Economics 21(2): 160–169.Google Scholar
Horowitz, J.K., and McConnell, K.E. 2002. “A Review of WTA/WTP Studies.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 44(3): 426–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houck, O.A. 1999. The Clean Water Act TMDL Program: Law, Policy, and Implementation. Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, B.S., and Syme, G.J. 2000. “Protest Responses and Willingness to Pay: Attitude Toward Paying for Stormwater Pollution.” Ecological Economics 33(2): 251–265.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, B.S., Syme, G.J., Bishop, B.J., and Nancarrow, B.E. 1999. “Protest Responses in Contingent Valuation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 14(1): 131–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laughland, A.S., Musser, W.N., and Musser, L.M. 1994. “An Experiment in Contingent Valuation and Social Desirability.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 23(1): 29–36.Google Scholar
Lindsey, E. 1994. “Market Models, Protest Bids, and Outliers in Contingent Valuation.” Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 120(1): 121–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messonnier, M.L., Bergstrom, J.C., Cornwell, C.M., Teasley, R.J., and Cordell, H.K. 2000. “Survey Response-Related Biases in Contingent Valuation: Concepts, Remedies, and Empirical Application to Valuing Aquatic Plant Management.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 83(2): 438–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerhoff, J., and Liebe, J. 2006. “Protest Beliefs in Contingent Valuation: Explaining Their Motivation.” Ecological Economics 57(4): 583–594.Google Scholar
Morrison, M.D., Blamey, R.K., and Bennett, J.W. 2000. “Minimising Payment Vehicle Bias in Contingent Valuation Studies.” Environmental and Resource Economics 16(4): 407–422.Google Scholar
Murphy, J.J., Allen, P.G., Stevens, T.H., and Weatherhead, D. 2005. “A Meta-Analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 30(3): 313–325.Google Scholar
Rosenberger, R.S., Collins, A.R., and Svetlik, J.B. 2005. “Private Provision of a Public Good: Willingness to Pay for Privately Stocked Trout.” Society and Natural Resources 18(1): 75–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strazzera, E., Scarpa, R., Calia, P., Garrod, G., and Willis, K. 2003a. “Modeling Zero Values and Protest Responses in Contingent Valuation Surveys.” Applied Economics 35(2): 133–138.Google Scholar
Strazzera, E., Genius, M., Scarpa, R. and Hutchinson, G. 2003b. “The Effect of Protest Votes on the Estimates of WTP for Use Values of Recreational Sites.” Environmental and Resource Economics 25(4): 461–476.Google Scholar
Taylor, J.G., and Douglas, A.J. 1999. “Diversifying Natural Resources Value Measurements: The Trinity River Study.” Society and Natural Resources 12(4): 315–337.Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. 2000 National Water Quality Inventory. Office of Water, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. Available online at www.epa.gov/305b/2000report/ (accessed May 1, 2006).Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. Region 3 TMDLs. U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. Available online at www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/tmdl/primer.htm (accessed August 7, 2006).Google Scholar
Wellman, J.D., Hawk, E.G., Roggenbuck, J.W., and Buhy-off, G.J. 1980. “Mailed Questionnaire Surveys and the Reluctant Respondent: An Empirical Examination of Differences Between Early and Late Respondents.” Journal of Leisure Research 12(2): 164–173.Google Scholar
Whitehead, J.C., Groothuis, P.A., and Blomquist, G.C. 1993. “Testing for Non-Response and Sample Selection Bias in Contingent Valuation: A Comparison of the Correction Methods.” Economic Letters 41(2): 215–230.Google Scholar
Ziemkiewicz, P. 2000. “Conceptual AMD Remediation Strategy for the Lower Cheat River.” Unpublished document prepared for the Friends of the Cheat, West Virginia Water Resources Research Institute, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.Google Scholar