I'm working on an agricultural technology project now. We used a double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation approach to assess consumer's willingness-to-pay (WTP). The study had four informational treatments, including the control. A series of questions were asked to respondents after they've responded to the DBDC section. Some of the questions are related to consumers' perceptions of environmental issues such as climate change. Is it wrong to use such questions as covariates in modeling WTP? Actually, the selected covariates are respondents' demographics.
Dear Willy Mulimbi : To estimate estimate WTP, you may only need to get bid1, bid2 and answers for the bids. However, if you are interested in examining factors affecting the bids (plus see whether the variables are consistent with theory), then you need to run regressions of the WTP with other variables (eg. environmental perception, demographic, especially income, etc.)
It might be interesting to look at.
It goes a bit into a different direction, but a few studies addressed the issue of deliberation and stability of preferences. It has often been argued under which conditions individuals can perform informed judgments. Thus, when individuals debate and exchange information, this might alter their choice behavior and also critisize the point of stable preferences.
So maybe after performing the valuation exercise, individuals might also make different statements about their environmental perception. But this is just an idea.
See:
Lliso, B., Pascual, U., Engel, S., & Mariel, P. (2020). Payments for ecosystem services or collective stewardship of Mother Earth? Applying deliberative valuation in an indigenous community in Colombia. Ecological Economics, 169, 106499.
Lliso, B., Mariel, P., Pascual, U., & Engel, S. (2020). Increasing the credibility and salience of valuation through deliberation: Lessons from the Global South. Global Environmental Change, 62, 102065.
- Badges
- Science topic