IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v12y1998i4p443-456.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multivariate Mixed Models for Open-Ended Contingent Valuation Data: Willingness To Pay For Conservation of Monk Seals

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Langford*
  • Areti Kontogianni
  • Mihalis Skourtos
  • Stavros Georgiou
  • Ian Bateman

Abstract

Although dichotomous choice (DC) contingent valuation (CV) has been recommended by the US NOAA 'blue-ribbon' panel for large-scale contingent valuation studies, useful information can still be obtained from smaller, open-ended (OE) studies, often undertaken as a precursor to a DC survey. The CV study considered here was carried out in Greece and looked at willingness-to-pay (WTP) for protecting the Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus-monachus) in the Aegean area. This is the most endangered seal in the world, and the application of the CV methodology was the first such application in Greece. The OE data consist of two responses: first, a binary response detailing whether or not respondents were in principle prepared to pay for the protection of this seal; secondly, those respondents who answered 'yes' to the first question were then asked to state their maximum WTP for such protection. A multivariate binomial – log-normal mixture model is used to develop a bid function including explanatory variables such as income, sex, age and education. Such a modelling approach provides an alternative to more commonplace tobit estimation. However, the model is extended to include further information which was collected on: (a) an increased WTP amount given in response to information that the initial WTP amount may not be enough to prevent the extinction of the seal; (b) respondents were asked to divide their final WTP amount between use, option and existence values, the latter requiring a multivariate model with four binary and four continuous responses per individual in the same model. The discussion focuses on the methodological issues raised with some comment on the substantive interpretation of results. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Langford* & Areti Kontogianni & Mihalis Skourtos & Stavros Georgiou & Ian Bateman, 1998. "Multivariate Mixed Models for Open-Ended Contingent Valuation Data: Willingness To Pay For Conservation of Monk Seals," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(4), pages 443-456, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:12:y:1998:i:4:p:443-456
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1008286001085
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1008286001085
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1008286001085?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harvey Goldstein & Jon Rasbash, 1996. "Improved Approximations for Multilevel Models with Binary Responses," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 159(3), pages 505-513, May.
    2. Ian H. Langford & Ian J. Bateman & Andrew P. Jones & Hugh D. Langford & Stavros Georgiou, 1998. "Improved Estimation of Willingness to Pay in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Studies," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(1), pages 65-75.
    3. James Tobin, 1956. "Estimation of Relationships for Limited Dependent Variables," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 3R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    4. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    5. Langford, Ian H. & Bateman, Ian J., 1996. "Elicitation and truncation effects in contingent valuation studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 265-267, December.
    6. Richard G. Walsh & John B. Loomis & Richard A. Gillman, 1984. "Valuing Option, Existence, and Bequest Demands for Wilderness," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 60(1), pages 14-29.
    7. Ian Langford & Ian Bateman & Hugh Langford, 1996. "A multilevel modelling approach to triple-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(3), pages 197-211, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bateman, Ian J. & Langford, Ian H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Kerr, Geoffrey N., 2001. "Bound and path effects in double and triple bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 191-213, July.
    2. Jette Jacobsen & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Are There Income Effects on Global Willingness to Pay for Biodiversity Conservation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 137-160, June.
    3. Langford, Ian H. & Bateman, Ian J., 1996. "Elicitation and truncation effects in contingent valuation studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 265-267, December.
    4. Richard O‘Conor & Magnus Johannesson & Per-Olov Johansson, 1999. "Stated Preferences, Real Behaviour and Anchoring: Some Empirical Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 235-248, March.
    5. Brown, Katrina & Adger, W. Neil & Tompkins, Emma & Bacon, Peter & Shim, David & Young, Kathy, 2001. "Trade-off analysis for marine protected area management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 417-434, June.
    6. Kristin Jakobsson & Andrew Dragun, 2001. "The Worth of a Possum: Valuing Species with the Contingent Valuation Method," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(3), pages 211-227, July.
    7. Seung-Jun Kwak & Clifford Russell, 1994. "Contingent valuation in Korean environmental planning: A pilot application to the protection of drinking water quality in Seoul," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(5), pages 511-526, October.
    8. Munro, Alistair, 2007. "When is some number really better than no number? On the optimal choice between non-market valuation methods," MPRA Paper 8978, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Seung-Hoon Yoo & Hee-Jong Yang, 2001. "Application of Sample Selection Model to Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(2), pages 147-163, October.
    10. Andrés Langebaek R. & Diego Vásquez E., 2007. "Determinantes de la actividad innovadora en la industria manufacturera colombiana," Borradores de Economia 433, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
    11. Medin, Hege & Nyborg, Karine & Bateman, Ian, 2001. "The assumption of equal marginal utility of income: how much does it matter?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 397-411, March.
    12. Bellelli, Francesco S. & Scarpa, Riccardo & Aftab, Ashar, 2023. "An empirical analysis of participation in international environmental agreements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    13. Ruud Hoevenagel, 1996. "The validity of the contingent valuation method: Perfect and regular embedding," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 57-78, January.
    14. Catherine Heyes & Anthony Heyes, 1999. "Willingness to Pay Versus Willingness to Travel: Assessing the Recreational Benefits from Dartmoor National Park," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 124-139, January.
    15. Michael Ahlheim & Oliver Frör & Antonia Heinke & Alwin Keil & Nguyen Minh Duc & Pham Van Dinh & Camille Saint-Macary & Manfred Zeller, 2008. "Landslides in mountainous regions of Northern Vietnam: Causes, protection strategies and the assessment of economic losses," Diskussionspapiere aus dem Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre der Universität Hohenheim 298/2008, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Germany.
    16. Dequan Hao & Rui Wang & Chaojie Gao & Xinyan Song & Wenxin Liu & Guangyin Hu, 2022. "Spatial-Temporal Characteristics and Influence Factors of Carbon Emission from Livestock Industry in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-23, November.
    17. Subramanian, S.V. & Acevedo-Garcia, Dolores & Osypuk, Theresa L., 2005. "Racial residential segregation and geographic heterogeneity in black/white disparity in poor self-rated health in the US: a multilevel statistical analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(8), pages 1667-1679, April.
    18. Rajiv Kalra & Kam C. Chan, 1994. "Censored Sample Bias, Macroeconomic Factors, and Time on Market of Residential Housing," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 9(2), pages 253-262.
    19. Schipmann, Christin & Qaim, Matin, 2011. "Supply chain differentiation, contract agriculture, and farmers’ marketing preferences: the case of sweet pepper in Thailand," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 108349, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    20. S Georgiou & I H Langford & I J Bateman & R K Turner, 1998. "Determinants of Individuals' Willingness to Pay for Perceived Reductions in Environmental Health Risks: A Case Study of Bathing Water Quality," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 30(4), pages 577-594, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:12:y:1998:i:4:p:443-456. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.