Abstract
At the end of the 1950s, resource economists developed a method to derive demand functions for recreation sites from travel cost data for recreation planning purposes. Based on this work, a second, direct method of measurement was developed in the early sixties that became known as the contingent valuation method. Initially, this method asked respondents directly about their willingness to pay for a realistically described recreational amenity. When contingent valuation became used for valuation studies of environmental and health issues in a regulatory and legal framework, initial support for the method from resource and mainstream economists faded away, leading to a split in the profession between those who considered the method fit for this second purpose and those who considered this second use inappropriate and politically charged. Because much of this history has been told, including in this journal, the emphasis here is on the relation between indirect and direct inference pertaining to both methods, and the challenges that contingent valuation, as a method of direct inference, poses to the quality of a questionnaire and the possibilities of educating respondents in making a reasoned choice for the amenity on offer.
Subject
Economics and Econometrics,History
Reference42 articles.
1. Economics at the Fringe: Non-Market Valuation Studies and Their Role in Land Use Plans in the United States;Banzhaf;Journal of Environmental Management,2010
2. Constructing Markets: Environmental Economics and the Contingent Valuation Controversy;Banzhaf,2017
3. The Environmental Turn in Natural Resource Economics: John Krutilla and ‘Conservation Reconsidered.’;Banzhaf,2019
4. Use of Contingent Valuation Methodology in Natural Resource Damage Assessments: Legal Fact and Economic Fiction;Binger,1994
5. Does Contingent Valuation Work?;Bishop,1986
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Pricing the Priceless;HIST PERSP MOD ECON;2023-10-19