Valuing the Cultural Monuments of Armenia: Bayesian Updating of Prior Beliefs in Contingent Valuation

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in Valuing the Cultural Monuments of Armenia: Bayesian Updating of Prior Beliefs in Contingent Valuation SummaryWe use contingent valuation to place a value on the conservation of built cultural heritage sites in Armenia. When we present the hypothetical scenario in the questionnaire we spell out what would happen to the monuments in the absence of the government conservation program. We posit that respondents combine such information with their own prior beliefs, which the questionnaire also elicits, and that the WTP for the good or program is likely to be affected by these updated beliefs. We propose a Bayesian updating model of prior beliefs, and empirically implement it using the data from our survey. We find that uncertainty about what would happen to the monument in the absence of the program results in lower WTP amounts.

Willingness to Pay and Sensitivity to Time Framing: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application on Car Safety

“…The lognormal model rules out the possibility of zero WTP and to allow for respondents' WTP being equal to zero, Eq. (11) is estimated as a mixture model (An and Ayala, 1996;Haab, 1999;Werner, 1999;Alberini and Longo, 2009). 7 To estimate the mixture model we use the answers from a follow-up question to respondents who answered "no-no" which allow us to identify those respondents whose WTP equals zero.…”

The importance of regret minimization in the choice for renewable energy programmes: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment

“…Next, to investigate the suitability of the rational-based RUM and the bounded rational RRM model in analysing the data for the choice of renewable energy programmes, we explore the effect of changing the level of information provided to respondents for one of the attributes of the DCE. Several studies have investigated the effect of information on stated preferences studies (Boyle, 1989;Rolfe et al, 2002;Bergstrom et al, 1990;Spash and Hanley, 1995;Gao and Schroeder, 2009;Alberini and Longo, 2009), but none has investigated the effect of information on the choice paradigm.…”

“…a To avoid losing observations, we set the value of BILL equal to zero when there was a missing observation for that variable. By introducing the dummy variable NOBILL equal to one when there was a missing observation for BILL and zero otherwise in the model allows us to capture any statistical difference between respondents that reported and those that did not report their energy bill (see Alberini and Longo, 2009). A entails 30 minutes of black-out per year, 1% annual reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, no change in employment, and an increase in the electricity bill of £25 per quarter.…”

Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment

“…Carson et al, 2002;Del Saz Salazar and Mantagud Marques, 2005;Baez and Herrero, 2012); both external conditions and lack of conservation (e.g. Willis, 1994, Garrod et al, 1996Garrod and Willis, 2002;Alberini and Longo, 2009); and visitors' presence (e.g. Brown, 2004;Tuan and Navrud, 2008).…”