Pick a number, but not just any number: valuation uncertainty and maximum willingness to pay

References

• Adamowicz, W.L. 2004. “What's it Worth? An Examination of Historical Trends and Future Directions in Environmental Valuation.” Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 48 (3): 419–443.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akter, S., and J. Bennett. 2013. “Preference Uncertainty in Stated Preference Studies: Facts and Artefacts.” Applied Economics 45: 2107–2115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alberini, A., K. Boyle, and M. Welsh. 2003. “Analysis of Contingent Valuation Data with Multiple Bids and Response Options Allowing Respondents to Express Uncertainty.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 45: 40–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alberini, A., A. Longo, and M. Veronesi. 2007. “Basic Statistical Models for Stated Choice Studies.” In Valuing Environmental Amenities Using Stated Choice Studies: A Common Sense Approach to Theory and Practice, edited by B. Kanninen, 203–227. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bateman, I.J., R.T. Carson, B. Day, M. Hanemann, N. Hanley, T. Hett, M. Jones-Lee, G. Loomes, S. Mourato, E. Özdemiroglu, D.W. Pearce, R. Sugden, and J. Swanson. 2002. Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Bateman, I.J., B.H. Day, D.P. Dupont, and S. Georgiou. 2009. “Procedural Invariance Testing of the One-And-One-Half-Bound Dichotomous Choice Elicitation Method.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 91 (4): 806–820.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bateman, I.J., I.H. Langford, and J. Rasbash. 2001. “Willingness-to-Pay Question Format Effects in Contingent Valuation Studies.” In Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the US, EU, and Developing Countries, edited by I.J. Bateman and K.G. Willis, 511–539. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bateman, I.J., I.H. Langford, R.K. Turner, K.G. Willis, and G.D. Garrod. 1995. “Elicitation and Truncation Effects in Contingent Valuation Studies.” Ecological Economics 12: 161–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blomquist, G.C., K. Blumenschein, and M. Johannesson. 2009. “Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias Using Follow-Up Certainty Statements: Comparisons Between Probably/Definitely and a 10-Point Certainty Scale.” Environmental and Resource Economics 43: 473–502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumenschein, K., G.C. Blomquist, M. Johannesson, N. Horn, and P. Freeman. 2008. “Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias. Evidence from a Field Experiment.” The Economic Journal 118: 114–137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boadway, R.W., and N. Bruce. 1993. Welfare Economics. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Boman, M. 2009. “To Pay or Not to Pay for Biodiversity in Forests – What Scale Determines Responses to Willingness to Pay Questions with Uncertain Response Options?” Journal of Forest Economics 15 (1–2): 79–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boman, M., G. Bostedt, and B. Kriström. 1999. “Obtaining Welfare Bounds in Discrete-Response Valuation Studies: A Non-Parametric Approach.” Land Economics 75 (2): 284–294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyle, K.J. 2004. “Contingent Valuation in Practice.” In A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation, edited by P.A. Champ, K.J. Boyle, and T.C. Brown, 111–170. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Boyle, K.J., M.P. Welsh, and R.C. Bishop. 1988. “Validation of Empirical Measures of Welfare Change: Comment.” Land Economics 64 (1): 94–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broberg, T, and R. Brännlund. 2008. “An Alternative Interpretation of Multiple Bounded WTP Data–Certainty Dependent Payment Card Intervals.” Resource and Energy Economics 30: 555–567.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cameron, T.A., G.L. Poe, R.G. Ethier, and W.D. Schulze. 2002. “Alternative Nonmarket Value-Elicitation Methods: Are the Underlying Preferences the Same?” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 44 (3): 391–425.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson, R.T., and W.M. Hanemann. 2005. “Contingent Valuation.” In Handbook of Environmental Economics: Valuing Environmental Resources, edited by K.-G. Mäler and J.R. Vincent, Vol. 2. 821–936. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
   Google Scholar
• Champ, P.A., and R.C. Bishop. 2001. “Donation Payment Mechanisms and Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias.” Environmental and Resource Economics 19: 383–402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, M.F., N.E. Flores, and K.J. Boyle. 2003. “Multiple-Bounded Uncertainty Data as Probabilistic Intentions.” Land Economics 79 (4): 549–560.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, W.H. 1993. Econometric Analysis. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Håkansson, C. 2005. Valuation Uncertainty - What is It? Working Report 355. Umeå: Department of Forest Economics, SLU.
   Google Scholar
• Håkansson, C. 2008. “A New Valuation Question: Analysis of and Insights from Interval Open-Ended Data in Contingent Valuation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 39: 175–188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanemann, W.M. 1984. “Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66: 332–341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanemann, W.M., and B. Kanninen. 1998. The Statistical Analysis of Discrete-Response CV Data. Working Paper No. 798. Berkeley: Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics and Policy, Division of Agricultural and Natural Resources, University of California at Berkeley.
   Google Scholar
• Hanemann, W.M., B. Kriström, and C. Li. 1996. Nonmarket Valuation under Preference Uncertainty: Econometric Models and Estimation. Working Paper No. 794. Berkeley: Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of California at Berkeley.
   Google Scholar
• Hanley, N., B. Kriström, and J.F. Shogren. 2009. “Coherent Arbitrariness: On Value Uncertainty for Environmental Goods.” Land Economics 85 (1): 41–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison, G., and B. Kriström. 1995. “On the Interpretation of Responses in Contingent Valuation Surveys.” In Current Issues in Environmental Economics, edited by Per-Olov Johansson, B. Kriström, and K.-G. Mäler, 35–57. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johansson, P.-O. 1993. Cost–Benefit Analysis of Environmental Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Johansson, P.-O., and B. Kriström. 2012. The Economics of Evaluating Water Projects: Hydroelectricity Versus Other Uses. Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kanninen, B.A. 1995. “Bias in Discrete Response Contingent Valuation”. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 28: 114–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendall, M.G., and A. Stuart. 1977. The Advanced Theory of Statistics: Inference and Relationship. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Kendall, M., A. Stuart, and J.K. Ord. 1987. Kendall's Advanced Theory of Statistics. Volume 1: Distribution Theory. London: Charles Griffin.
   Google Scholar
• Kerr, G.N. 2000. “Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Probability Distributions.” Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 44 (2): 233–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keske, C.M.H., and A. Mayer. 2014. Visitor Willingness to Pay U.S. Forest Service Recreation Fees in New West Rural Mountain Economies. Economic Development Quarterly 28 (1): 87–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keynes, J.M. 1921. A Treatise of Probability. London: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Kriström, B. 1990. “A Non-Parametric Approach to the Estimation of Welfare Measures in Discrete Response Valuation Studies.” Land Economics 66: 135–139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kriström, B. 1997. “Spike Models in Contingent Valuation.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79 (3): 1013–1023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, C., and L. Mattsson. 1995. “Discrete Choice Under Preference Uncertainty: An Improved Structural Model for Contingent Valuation.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 28: 256–259.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loomis, J., and E. Ekstrand. 1998. “Alternative Approaches for Incorporating Respondent Uncertainty When Estimating Willingness to Pay: The Case of the Mexican Spotted Owl.” Ecological Economics 27: 29–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyssenko, N., and R. Martínez-Espiñeira. 2012. “Respondent Uncertainty in Contingent Valuation: The Case of Whale Conservation in Newfoundland and Labrador.” Applied Economics 44 (15): 1911–1930.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahieu, P.-A., P. Riera, B. Kriström, R. Brännlund, and M. Giergiczny. 2014. “Exploring the Determinants of Uncertainty in Contingent Valuation Surveys.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy 3 (2): 186–200.
   Google Scholar
• Martínez-Espiñeira, R., and N. Lyssenko. 2012. “Alternative Approaches to Dealing with Respondent Uncertainty in Contingent Valuation: A Comparative Analysis.” Journal of Environmental Management 93 (1): 130–139.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meeker, W.O., and L.A. Escobar. 1998. Statistical Methods for Reliability Data. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Mitani, Y., and N.E. Flores. 2014. “Hypothetical Bias Reconsidered: Payment and Provision Uncertainties in a Threshold Provision Mechanism.” Environmental and Resource Economics 59: 433–454.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, R.C., and R.T. Carson. 1989. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, R., R.C. Bishop, B. Provencher, and P.A. Champ. 2010. “Accounting for Respondent Uncertainty to Improve Willingness-to-Pay Estimates.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 58: 381–401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, J.J., P.G. Allen, T.H. Stevens, and D. Weatherhead. 2005. “A Meta-Analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 30: 313–325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, J.J., T.H. Stevens, and L. Yadav. 2010. “A Comparison of Induced Value and Home-Grown Value Experiments to Test for Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 47: 111–123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman, J. 2009. Amenities of Swedish Forests: Attitudes and Values Among Stakeholders. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Sueciae 2009: 76. Alnarp: Southern Swedish Forest Research Centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Norton, J.D. 2008. “Ignorance and Indifference.” Philosophy of Science 75: 45–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearson, E.S., and H.O. Hartley. 1972. “Biometrika Tables for Statisticians.” Biometrical Journal 16 (4): 291.
   Google Scholar
• Ramsey, F.P. 1926. “Truth and Probability.” Ch. VII in Ramsey, 1931, The Foundations of Mathematics and other Logical Essays, edited by R.B. Braithwaite, 156–198. London: Kegan, Paul, Trench, Trubner.
   Google Scholar
• Ready, R.C., and D. Hu. 1995. “Statistical Approaches to the Fat Tail Problem for Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation.” Land Economics 71 (4): 491–499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SCB 2008. Befolkningens Utbildning 2008, Korrigerad 2012-09-07. Statistiska Meddelanden UF 37 SM 0901. Stockholm: SCB. http://www.scb.se/statistik/UF/UF0506/2008A01D/UF0506_2008A01D_SM_UF37SM0901.pdf
   Google Scholar
• SCB 2010. Statistisk årsbok, Statistical Yearbook of Sweden 2010. Stockholm: SCB.
   Google Scholar
• SCB 2016a. “Regionala räkenskaper 1993–2008, äldre serier. Korrigerad 2016-07-08.” Statistics Sweden. Accessed 14 December 2016. http://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/nationalrakenskaper/nationalrakenskaper/regionalrakenskaper/pong/tabell-och-diagram/regionala-rakenskaper-19932008-aldre-serier.-korrigerad-2016-07-08/
   Google Scholar
• SCB 2016b. “Folkmängd i län 1749–2015”. Statistics Sweden. Accessed 14 December 2016. http://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/befolkning/befolkningens-sammansattning/befolkningsstatistik/pong/tabell-och-diagram/helarsstatistik–kommun-lan-och-riket2/folkmangd-i-lan-17492015/
   Google Scholar
• SCB 2016c. “Statistikdatabasen.” Statistics Sweden. Accessed 14 December 2016. http://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/sq/22783
   Google Scholar
• SCB 2016d. “Average Age of the Population by Region and Sex. Year 1998–2015.” Statistics Sweden. Accessed 14 December 2016. http://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/sq/22781
   Google Scholar
• Shaikh, S.L., L. Sun, and G.C. van Kooten. 2007. “Treating Respondent Uncertainty in Contingent Valuation: A Comparison of Empirical Treatments.” Ecological Economics 62: 115–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shorack, G., and J. Wellner. 1986. Empirical Processes with Applications to Statistics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• SPAR 2016. “Statens Personadressregister.” Accessed 22 January 2017. https://www.statenspersonadressregister.se/ovre-meny/english-summary.html
   Google Scholar
• Stephens, M.A. 1974. “EDF Statistics for Goodness of Fit and Some Comparisons.” Journal of American Statistical Association 69 (347): 730–737.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephens, M.A. 1976. “Asymptotic Results for Goodness-of-Fit Statistics with Unknown Parameters.” The Annals of Statistics 4 (2): 357–369.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephens, M.A. 1977. “Goodness of Fit for the Extreme Value Distribution.” Biometrika 64 (3): 583–588.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephens, M.A. 1979. “Tests of Fit for the Logistic Distribution Based on the Empirical Distribution Function.” Biometrika 66 (3): 591–595.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephens, M.A. 1986. “Tests Based on EDF Statistics.” In Goodness-of-Fit Techniques, edited by R.B. D'Agostino and M.A. Stephens, 97–193, 372–373. New York: Marcel Dekker.
   Google Scholar
• Van Kooten, G.C., E. Kremar, and E.H. Bulte. 2001. “Preference Uncertainty in Non-Market Valuation: A Fuzzy Approach.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 83 (3): 487–500.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, H. 1997. “Treatment of ‘Don't Know’ Responses in Contingent Valuation Surveys: A Random Valuation Model.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32: 219–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welsh, M.P., and R.C. Bishop. 1993. “Multiple Bounded Discrete Choice Models.” In “Benefits & Costs Transfer in Natural Resource Planning”, Western Regional Research Publication, W-133, Sixth Interim Report, edited by J. Bergstrom, 331–352. Athens, GA: Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia.
   Google Scholar
• Welsh, M., and G. Poe. 1998. “Elicitation Effects in Contingent Valuation: Comparisons to a Multiple Bounded Discrete Choice Approach.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 36: 170–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitehead, J.C., M.S. Weddell, and P.A. Groothuis. 2016. “Mitigating Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Data: Evidence from Sports Tourism.” Economic Inquiry 54: 605–611.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar