Revealed and stated preference valuation and transfer: A within‐sample comparison of water quality improvement values

Ferrini, Silvia; Schaafsma, Marije; Bateman, Ian J.

doi:10.1002/2013wr014905

Cited by 20 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the realized preference sample, mean WTP was estimated at 39 cents (lower CI = −14; upper CI = 193), truncated mean was 149 cents (lower CI = 25; upper CI = 4821), and median was 39 cents (lower CI = −103; upper CI = 192). While WTP estimates from the realized preference sample were lower, overlapping confidence intervals indicated that these results were not significantly different (Ferrini et al, ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…We compared mean and median WTP and associated CIs estimated from stated and realized preference methods (Ferrini, Schaafsma, & Bateman, ). We used a chi‐square statistical test to determine whether the deviations between the expected numbers of individuals who indicated their willingness to pay a price premium on the CV survey were different from the number who actually paid a price premium (Carlsson, Garcia, & Lofgren, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing stated and realized preferences for shade‐grown vs. conventionally grown coffee

Klimas

Webb

2017

Int J Consumer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We used both stated preference and revealed preference data to estimate willingness to pay (WTP) for shade-grown coffee as compared with conventionally grown coffee. Stated preference data was collected using contingent valuation studies. Revealed preference data came from an experiment where all survey participants received a personally identifiable voucher redeemable for a free bakery item when the holder purchased a coffee. We compared estimates of mean and median WTP a price premium for shade-grown coffee from stated preference data with similar estimates from revealed preference data. We used a logit model to evaluate the effect of explanatory variables (measures of environmental attitudes, personal norms for pro-environmental behaviour and demographic variables) on respondents' WTP a price premium for shade grown coffee. Model parameters were estimated using the maximum likelihood approach. Respondents with higher scores on measures of environmental attitudes and personal norms for proenvironmental behaviour were, on average, willing to pay more for shade-grown coffee. While this paper examined a specific case, purchase of shade-grown coffee, our results confirmed that stated environmental concern was a good predictor of pro-environmental behaviour. We found that mean and median WTP estimates from stated preference methods were higher, but not significantly different than mean and median WTP estimates from actual purchases, indicating convergent validity between stated and realized preference methods. The majority of individuals both stated WTP a price premium and purchased shade-grown coffee at a price premium. We did, however notice some interesting behaviour at the individual level where stated preferences under-predicted realized preferences at low price-premia and over-predicted realized preferences at high price premia.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing stated and realized preferences for shade‐grown vs. conventionally grown coffee

Klimas

Webb

2017

Int J Consumer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The payment vehicle was presented as a hypothetical increase to the respondents' annual domestic water bill. The payment vehicle corresponded with those used in previous studies on water quality improvements in public areas [11,24]. We believed that this approach would be most appropriate as, in the UK, domestic water bills also include a sum towards improving wastewater services that, in turn, leads to improved river water quality.…”

Section: Survey Instruments and Choice Experiments Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the model function contains distance, a key element for transferability, and the dataset includes other useful variables, such as income. Previous research [24] has suggested that in most cases, differences between WTP estimates obtained by different methods (e.g., travel cost or contingent valuation) are larger than differences due to dissimilar river characteristics: when multiple studies are available, welfare estimates for rivers that have similar characteristics, but are based on different methods, consistently result in larger errors than transfers across space, keeping the method constant. With this in mind, it may be beneficial in the future to assess our results against those obtained by studies that use similar methods and were undertaken at rivers with similar characteristics.…”

Section: Research Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

River Water Quality: Who Cares, How Much and Why?

Hampson

Ferrini

Rigby

et al. 2017

Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An important motivation for the implementation of the Water Framework Directive is the creation of non-market environmental benefits, such as improved ecological quality, or greater opportunities for open-access river recreation via microbial pollution remediation. Pollution sources impacting on ecological or recreational water quality may be uncorrelated, but non-market benefits arising from riverine improvements are typically conflated within benefit valuation studies. Using stated preference choice experiments embedded within a survey that also collected respondents' socio-economic characteristics, we aimed to disaggregate these sources of value for different river users, thereby allowing decision makers to understand the consequences of adopting alternative investment strategies. Our results suggested that anglers derived greater value from improvements to the ecological quality of river water, in contrast to swimmers and rowers, for whom greater value is gained from improvements to recreational quality. More generally, we found three distinct groups of respondents: a majority preferring ecological over recreational improvements, a substantial minority holding opposing preference orderings, and a yet smaller proportion expressing relatively low values for either form of river quality enhancement. As such, this research demonstrates that the non-market benefits that may accrue from different types of water quality improvements are nuanced in terms of their potential beneficiaries and, by inference, their overall value and policy implications.

show abstract

“…Among these tools, revealed preference and stated preference techniques are usually applied to estimate ecosystem services that lack a market value, such as recreation. Revealed preference methods infer values from observed behavior, and thus, from actual choices people make within markets (Boyle, 2003;Ferrini et al, 2014). Stated preference methods attempt to establish non-market values using survey questions, usually by asking respondents to choose between different scenarios (Brown, 2003;Metcalfe et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial Inputs for Ecosystem Service Outputs: Beach Recreation Recovery After Investments in Ecological Restoration

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the Nerbioi estuary (North Spain), the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) constructed in 1990 resulted in an abrupt decrease in water pollution and an opportunity for improved recreational experiences in the three beaches on the estuary. The monetary value of these recreational benefits was estimated using the travel cost method and compared, via a partial cost-benefit analysis, with the costs of beach maintenance. The travel cost models reveal that summer recreational trips to the three Nerbioi beaches have a value of 5.99, 7.06, and 8.09 € trip −1 , respectively. Visitor's profile and social characteristics influenced the models, while the effects of these variables also varied across beaches. Following a conservative approach, the aggregate recreational value of the estuarine beaches was estimated to be more than 3.5 million year −1. This economic benefit, obtained from summer estimates and focusing on one ecosystem service (i.e., beach recreation) from the multiple ones offered by the estuary, is sufficient to cover 100% of annual beach maintenance costs and 12% of the annual sewerage system running costs. Our findings highlight that investing in water sanitation projects such as WWTPs are not only important for the ecological recovery of degraded coastal environments, but also produce additional human benefits that are able to cover (at least) part of the running cost of these large capital investments.

show abstract

Revealed and stated preference valuation and transfer: A within‐sample comparison of water quality improvement values

Cited by 20 publications

References 66 publications

Comparing stated and realized preferences for shade‐grown vs. conventionally grown coffee

Comparing stated and realized preferences for shade‐grown vs. conventionally grown coffee

River Water Quality: Who Cares, How Much and Why?

Financial Inputs for Ecosystem Service Outputs: Beach Recreation Recovery After Investments in Ecological Restoration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About