The contingent valuation method: a review

By L. Venkatachalam. 2004

1,028 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a48e4b7ea9410184a0a4a4aec5625b71908ad946

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

What determines urban households' willingness to pay for CO2 emission reductions in Turkey: A contingent valuation survey (2011, methodology): “…monetary amounts as oneoff contribution for WTP a ‘‘double-bounded dichotomous choice’’ elicitation framework was used to deal with possible incentivecompatibility problems and make it easier for respondents to formulate an answer (Arrow et al., 1993; Scarpa and Bateman, 2000; Venkatachalam, 2004).”
Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis and Cost-Benefit Analysis: Comparing alternative frameworks for integrated valuation of ecosystem services (2016, neutral): “…methods in both MCDA and stated preference studies are prone to several cognitive and motivational biases such as framing bias, anchoring bias, splitting bias, proxy attribute bias and strategic bias (Weber et al. 1988; Venkatachalam 2004; Retief et al. 2013; Montibeller and von Winterfeldt 2015).”
Behavioral economics for environmental policy (2008, background): “…irreversibility and limited learning opportunities (Kling et al., 2003; Zhao and Kling, 2001), positive transaction cost of exchange (see Venkatachalam, 2004), lack of experience of individuals in the market processes (List, 2003; Shogren et al., 1994) and improper administration of…”
Willingness to pay for flying carbon neutral in Australia: an exploratory study of offsetter profiles (2014, methodology): “…preference techniques such as CVM and CM. CVM has been widely used for the past four decades (Bateman & Turner, 1993; Mitchell & Carson, 1989; Venkatachalam, 2004) while applications of the CM technique have been rapidly increasing recently in a variety of disciplines such as transportation,…”
The argument against a reductionist approach for measuring sustainable development performance and the need for methodological pluralism (2009, background): “Venkatachalam (2004) exposes a string of methodological issues that affect the validity and reliability of non-market valuation techniques such as the CVM. Issues such as discrepancies between elicited willingness to pay (WTP)/willingness to accept (WTA) values, provision of information and…”
Economic valuation of cultural heritage sites: A choice modeling approach (2010, methodology): “In common with other stated preference techniques CVM estimates are prone to various types of bias (Bateman et al., 2002: pp. 296–342; Venkatachalam, 2004: pp. 90–117).”
Ecosystem service value assessment for constructed wetlands: A case study in Hangzhou, China (2008, methodology): “In sum, criticismsmainly arise from two standpoints, namely, the validity and the reliability of the results, and the effects of various biases and errors (Venkatachalam, 2004).”
Contingent valuation of ecotourism in Annapurna conservation area, Nepal: implications for sustainable park finance and local development. (2008, methodology): “While certain sources of potential bias cannot be entirely removed from the method, each can be controlled to a certain degree through careful study design, allowing for reasonably reliable results (Arrow et al., 1993; Venkatachalam, 2004 ).”
The Hidden and External Costs of Pesticide Use (2016, methodology): “The contingent valuation method – also referred to as stated willingness to pay – is also often used for the market valuation of non-market goods (Venkatachalam 2004 ).”