Post on 05-Jan-2016
Using Stated Preferences:Comments
Anna AlberiniUniversity of Maryland
What Should We Use SP for?
• Presentations are focused on the benefits of TMDL requirements
• …but they could also be used to assess potential and cost-effectiveness of policies, esp. those aimed at homeowners, small businesses, numerous entities– E.g. rain gardens, rain barrels– See ERS-USDA researchers present at this
workshop
Stated Preference Methods • Contingent valuation– would you pay $X for…?– gets non-use values– Protest responses
• Contingent behavior – Would you still go to…/how many times would you go to…
[under new conditions]?– Well suited with recreational users
• Conjoint choice experiments– Private goods [e.g., recreational trips] or policy packages– Attribute-based– Non-use values?
Moore presentation
• Combined RP-SP– recreational users/uses
• Can do within the same questionnaire in original survey
• Likely to work well for Bay recreational users and commercial fishermen
– Housing values• Earlier work has produced
mixed results
• No data on non-fishing recreation/other places in watershed
– Not difficult to develop new data:• Marinas, state registration
lists for boaters, etc.
Moore presentation (2)• Concerns about double
counting– Select your categories of
users/not users carefully
• Concerns about time horizons re: credibility of questionnaire– People probably
understand that it took a long time to mess up the Bay and that it will take a long time to fix it up
• Payment vehicle– People may have preferences
over the payment vehicle– E.g., I am willing to pay for
improved storm water mgmt. but not for farmers to improve their practices (even if they affected the CB to the same extent)
– Split-sample treatments to test?
– “distance traveled for choice experiment” (slide 4)?
Boyd-Krupnick Take home message:
U=U(Acres, h(Acres), g(h(Acres))
Acres of wetlands
Ecological services of wetlands
Home production function of ecological services of wetlands
• Earlier SP research has found that people are generally willing to pay more for more acres, more species abundance, etc.
• Scope but not WTP not strictly proportional to acres, species, etc.
Both presentations
• “Iconic” value of the CB prefer to say “historic/cultural heritage site”
• Why worry about “warm glow?” perfectly legitimate component of WTP for the Bay, esp. non-users
• Concur that surveys should not focus on jobs, watermen, Amish, …