|Beattie, J., Covey, J., Dolan, P., Hopkins, L., Jones-Lee, M., Loomes, G., Pidgeon, Nicholas Frank, Robinson, A. and Spencer, A. 1998. On the contingent valuation of safety and the safety of contingent valuation: Part 1-caveat investigator. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 17 (1) , pp. 5-26. 10.1023/A:1007711416843|
This article reports the results of two studies aimed at testing and refining a procedure for estimating willingness-to-pay based monetary values of safety using the contingent valuation method. In spite of the fact that respondents were given the opportunity to discuss various safety issues and key concepts in focus group meetings held in advance of individual interviews, and were also given ample opportunity to revise their responses in the light of the overall pattern of these responses, the results show clear evidence of extensive and persistent insensitivity to the scale and scope of the safety improvements that were specified in the contingent valuation questions, as well as vulnerability to framing effects. This clearly casts serious doubt on the reliability and validity of willingness-to-pay based monetary values of safety estimated using conventional contingent valuation procedures.
|Subjects:||B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology
H Social Sciences > HD Industries. Land use. Labor > HD61 Risk Management
|Uncontrolled Keywords:||safety; contingent valuation; embedding; scope; sequencing|
|Last Modified:||15 Nov 2013 10:29|
Cited 178 times in Google Scholar. View in Google Scholar
Cited 95 times in Web of Science. View in Web of Science.
Actions (repository staff only)