6533b821fe1ef96bd127b7a3

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Respondent Uncertainty and Ordering Effect on Willingness to Pay for Salt Marsh Conservation in the Brest Roadstead (France)

Hermann Pythagore Pierre DonfouetAgathe LarzilliereClaudio PirroneLouinord Voltaire

subject

Ordering effectEconomics and Econometricsmedia_common.quotation_subject010501 environmental sciences01 natural sciencesWillingness to paySalt marsh conservation0502 economics and businessEconomicsContingent valuationPreference uncertainty0105 earth and related environmental sciencesGeneral Environmental Sciencemedia_commonValuation (finance)Selection biasContingent valuationgeographyActuarial sciencegeography.geographical_feature_category05 social sciences[SHS.ECO]Humanities and Social Sciences/Economics and FinancePayment cardPayment card formatSalt marshRespondent[SDE]Environmental Sciences050202 agricultural economics & policyWelfare

description

International audience; This paper explores the potential link between the sensitivity of willingness to pay (WTP) to the order of presenting bid amounts in contingent valuation questions (ordering effect) and respondent uncertainty. The resource being valued is a public project to protect salt marshes against the spread of an invasive aquatic plant in the Brest roadstead (France). Valuation uncertainty is captured through a variant of payment card format where respondents are given the opportunity to report their WTP as either a single value (Option A) or an interval of values (Option B). The ordering effect is tested using both parametric models that ignore and control for the potential sample selection bias related to the choice between Option A and Option B, as well as non-parametric models. The results suggest that (1) respondents place substantial WTP values on salt marsh conservation, and (2) the ordering effect is linked to respondent uncertainty since only uncertain respondents react differently to changes in the order of presenting bid amounts. Specifically, for uncertain respondents, putting bid amounts in ascending order yields lower welfare estimates than putting bid amounts in descending order or random order. Policy recommendations and options to deal with ordering effect are discussed. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.02.029https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02149952