IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/uwp/landec/v76y2000i2p299-311.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficiency Gains Afforded by Improved Bid Design versus Follow-up Valuation Questions in Discrete-Choice CV Studies

Author

Listed:
  • Riccardo Scarpa
  • Ian Bateman

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Interval data analysis of CV discrete choice responses delivers efficiency gains which must be weighed against the risk of introducing strategic response bias. Efficiency gains are also achievable by improved bid design. We assess these gains on median WTP estimates first in an empirical application, then by means of a Monte Carlo experiment comparing three different bid designs. Improved, but sub-optimal, bid design delivers comparable gains to those achieved by one and two follow-up questions. The first follow-up captures more than 50% of the efficiency gain provided by a second follow-up.

Suggested Citation

  • Riccardo Scarpa & Ian Bateman, 2000. "Efficiency Gains Afforded by Improved Bid Design versus Follow-up Valuation Questions in Discrete-Choice CV Studies," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(2), pages 299-311.
    • Handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:76:y:2000:i:2:p:299-311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/3147230
    Download Restriction: A subscripton is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:uwp:landec:v:76:y:2000:i:2:p:299-311. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://le.uwpress.org/ .

    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.