Table of Contents

The International Handbook on Non-Market Environmental Valuation

The International Handbook on Non-Market Environmental Valuation

Elgar original reference

Edited by Jeff Bennett

Non-market environmental valuation (NMEV) is undergoing a period of increased growth in both application and development as a result of increasing recognition of the role of economics in environmental policy issues. Against this backdrop, The International Handbook on Non-Market Environmental Valuation brings together world leaders in the field to advance the development and application of NMEV as a tool for policy-making.

Chapter 10: Efficiency versus Bias: The Role of Distributional Parameters in Count Contingent Behaviour Models

Jeffrey Englin, Arwin Pang and Thomas Holmes

Subjects: economics and finance, environmental economics, valuation, environment, environmental economics, valuation

Extract

Jeffrey Englin, Arwin Pang and Thomas Holmes1 INTRODUCTION One of the challenges facing many applications of non-market valuations is to find data with enough variation in the variable(s) of interest to estimate econometrically their effects on the quantity demanded. A solution to this problem was the introduction of stated preference surveys. These surveys can introduce variation into variables where there is no natural variation and, as a result, natural experiments are not possible. The problem of no or insufficient variation in naturally occurring data to estimate the effects of interest has led to a large literature on stated preference methods. Among the methods developed, two can be linked directly to observed behaviour. Unlike contingent valuation questions, these approaches key off of actual choices that individuals have made in the past or are contemplating in the future. Consequently, the consistency of these choices with the responses to stated preference questions can be examined. The two methods are those based upon random utility theory and those based upon demand theory. While the two can be linked theoretically in practice, one either adopts a random utility framework or a demand framework. The demand framework, adopted here, is frequently identified as a ‘contingent behaviour’ approach. The contingent behaviour method was proposed by Englin and Cameron (1996). Their paper suggests focusing on the number of trips an individual might make under different situations rather than how a single choice might vary (random utility model) under different situations. The advantage of the contingent behaviour model...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information