How Reliable are Meta-Analyses for International Benefit Transfers?

Meta-analysis has increasingly been used to synthesise the environmental valuation literature, but only a few test the use of these analyses for benefit transfer. These are typically based on national studies only. However, meta-analyses of valuation studies across countries are a potentially powerful tool for benefit transfer, especially for environmental goods where the domestic literature is scarce. We test the reliability of such international meta-analytic transfers, and find that even under conditions of homogeneity in valuation methods, cultural and institutional conditions across countries, and a meta-analysis with large explanatory power, the transfer errors could still be large. Further, international meta-analytic transfers do not on average perform better than simple value transfers averaging over domestic studies. Thus, we question whether the use of meta-analysis for practical benefit transfer achieves reliability gains justifying the increased effort. However, more meta-analytic benefit transfer tests should be performed for other environmental goods and other countries before discarding international meta-analysis as a tool for benefit transfer.benefit transfer, environmental valuation, meta-analysis, forest

Can cheap panel-based internet surveys substitute costly in-person interviews in CV surveys?

With the current growth in broadband penetration, Internet is likely to be the data collection mode of choice for stated preference research in the not so distant future. However, little is known about how this survey mode may influence data quality and welfare estimates. In a first controlled field experiment to date as part of a national contingent valuation (CV) survey estimating willingness to pay (WTP) for biodiversity protection plans, we assign two groups sampled from the same panel of respondents either to an Internet or in-person (in-house) interview mode. Our design is better able than previous studies to isolate measurement effects from sample composition effects. We find little evidence of social desirability bias in the in-person interview setting or satisficing (shortcutting the response process) in the Internet survey. The share of “don’t knows”, zeros and protest responses to the WTP question with a payment card is very similar between modes. Equality of mean WTP between samples cannot be rejected. Considering equivalence, we can reject that mean WTP from the in-person sample is more than 30% higher. Results are quite encouraging for the use of Internet in CV as stated preferences do not seem to be significantly different or biased compared to in-person interviews.Internet; contingent valuation; interviews; survey mode; willingness to pay

Internet CV surveys – a cheap, fast way to get large samples of biased values?

With the current growth in broadband penetration, Internet is likely to be the data collection mode of choice for contingent valuation (CV) and stated preference research in the not so distant future. However, little is known about how this survey mode may influence data quality and welfare estimates. In a controlled field experiment as part of a large national CV survey estimating willingness to pay (WTP) for biodiversity protection plans, we assign two groups sampled from the same panel of respondents, either to an Internet or in-person interview mode. Our design is better able than previous mode comparison studies to isolate measurement effects from sample composition effects. Looking in particular for indications of social desirability bias and satisficing (shortcutting the response process) we find little evidence in our data. We find that the extent of “don’t know”, zeros and protest responses to the WTP question (with a payment card) is very similar between modes. Mean WTP is somewhat higher in the interview sample, though we cannot reject equality on the 10 percent level. We also consider equivalence, i.e. whether the WTP difference is larger than a practically trivial predetermined bound. We can reject that the difference is larger than 30 percent, but fail to reject an equivalency bound of 20 percent on the 10 percent level. Results are quite encouraging for the use of Internet as values do not seem to be significantly different or substantially biased compared to in-person interviews.Internet; contingent valuation; interviews; mode; willingness to pay

Act locally? Are female online shoppers willing to pay to reduce the carbon footprint of last mile deliveries?

E-commerce results in more last mile deliveries, increased freight traffic and potentially also higher CO2- emissions. This paper is a novel contribution to the literature in terms of investigating consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for climate-friendly last mile deliveries through reduced or no CO2-emissions from the delivery. 460 females between 18 and 70 years of age responded to an internet panel survey about their stated preferences for last mile delivery options for online clothing rentals. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was performed and the data analyzed using both multinomial logit (MNL) and mixed multinomial logit (MMNL) models. The results show that females are willing to pay for CO2-mitigation, and that their WTP increases with consumer income, employment, willingness to change habits to solve the environmental challenges of today, and preferences for sustainable online shopping and delivery alternatives, but decreases with the frequency of online shopping. The WTP for 1 kg CO2 exceeds the WTP for any other aspects of the last mile delivery; i.e. delivery time, delays and information services (notification of departure and arrival). The results indicate that freight operators (carriers) and online retailers can transfer (some of) the costs of climate-friendly last mile delivery to their customers. This is important knowledge for urban planners as it provides support for CO2-mitigating measures aimed at last mile delivery services in order to achieve more environmentally sustainable urban freight transport.publishedVersio

Valuing energy poverty costs: Household welfare loss from electricity blackouts in developing countries

publishedVersio

Valuing forest recreation on the national level in a transition economy: The case of Poland

Recreation benefits constitute a substantial part of the total economic value of forests, and are important for the choice of multi-functional forest policies. The application of methods valuing such benefits is in its infancy in transition economies in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), so value estimates for policy use are sometimes transferred from Western Europe proportionally scaled down by GDP. However, little is known about how recreation values vary with income, and one risks underestimating benefits in CEE. This paper reports the findings of the first comprehensive, national-level study in any CEE country estimating annual and per trip forest recreation values in Poland using the Travel Cost (TC) and Contingent Valuation (CV) methods. Two in-person interview surveys of forest recreation behaviour were carried out. The first was administered onsite in ten representative forest areas, and the other in the homes of a national sample of adult Poles. Results show that forest recreation is highly valued in Poland, at Euros 0.64 – 6.93 per trip per person, depending on the valuation method. Both trip frequency and per trip values are higher than the average in Western Europe, despite a lower income level. Thus, a simple GDP-adjusted transfer from Western Europe would substantially undervalue forest recreation in Poland. Further, a comparison of TC consumer surplus estimates and GDP/capita in Europe shows no clear relationship, indicating that a range of cultural, institutional and other factors may be importantForest, recreation, valuation, transition economy

Asking for Individual or Household Willingness to Pay for Environmental Goods? Implication for aggregate welfare measures

The aggregate welfare measure for a change in the provision of a public good derived from a contingent valuation (CV) survey will be much higher if the same elicited mean willingness to pay (WTP) is added up over individuals rather than households. A trivial fact, however, once respondents are part of multi-person households it becomes almost impossible to elicit an “uncontaminated” WTP measure that with some degree of confidence can be aggregated over one or the other response unit. The literature is mostly silent about which response unit to use in WTP questions and in some CV studies it is even unclear which type has actually been applied. We test for differences between individual and household WTP in a novel, web-administered, split-sample CV survey asking WTP for preserving biodiversity in old-growth coniferous forests in Norway. Two samples are asked both types of questions, but in reverse order, followed by a question with an item battery trying to reveal why WTP may differ. We find in a between-sample test that the WTP respondents state on behalf of their households is not significantly different from their individual WTP. However, within the same sample, household WTP is significantly higher than individual WTP; in particular if respondents are asked to state individual before household WTP. Our results suggest that using individual WTP as the response unit would overestimate aggregate WTP, and thus bias welfare estimates in benefit-cost analyses. Thus, the choice of response format needs to be explicitly and carefully addressed in CV questionnaire design in order to avoid the risk of unprofitable projects passing the benefit-cost tes

Can cheap panel-based internet surveys substitute costly in-person interviews in CV surveys?

With the current growth in broadband penetration, Internet is likely to be the data collection mode of choice for stated preference research in the not so distant future. However, little is known about how this survey mode may influence data quality and welfare estimates. In a first controlled field experiment to date as part of a national contingent valuation (CV) survey estimating willingness to pay (WTP) for biodiversity protection plans, we assign two groups sampled from the same panel of respondents either to an Internet or in-person (in-house) interview mode. Our design is better able than previous studies to isolate measurement effects from sample composition effects. We find little evidence of social desirability bias in the in-person interview setting or satisficing (shortcutting the response process) in the Internet survey. The share of “don’t knows”, zeros and protest responses to the WTP question with a payment card is very similar between modes. Equality of mean WTP between samples cannot be rejected. Considering equivalence, we can reject that mean WTP from the in-person sample is more than 30% higher. Results are quite encouraging for the use of Internet in CV as stated preferences do not seem to be significantly different or biased compared to in-person interviews

Asking for Individual or Household Willingness to Pay for Environmental Goods? Implication for aggregate welfare measures

The aggregate welfare measure for a change in the provision of a public good derived from a contingent valuation (CV) survey will be much higher if the same elicited mean willingness to pay (WTP) is added up over individuals rather than households. A trivial fact, however, once respondents are part of multi-person households it becomes almost impossible to elicit an “uncontaminated” WTP measure that with some degree of confidence can be aggregated over one or the other response unit. The literature is mostly silent about which response unit to use in WTP questions and in some CV studies it is even unclear which type has actually been applied. We test for differences between individual and household WTP in a novel, web-administered, split-sample CV survey asking WTP for preserving biodiversity in old-growth coniferous forests in Norway. Two samples are asked both types of questions, but in reverse order, followed by a question with an item battery trying to reveal why WTP may differ. We find in a between-sample test that the WTP respondents state on behalf of their households is not significantly different from their individual WTP. However, within the same sample, household WTP is significantly higher than individual WTP; in particular if respondents are asked to state individual before household WTP. Our results suggest that using individual WTP as the response unit would overestimate aggregate WTP, and thus bias welfare estimates in benefit-cost analyses. Thus, the choice of response format needs to be explicitly and carefully addressed in CV questionnaire design in order to avoid the risk of unprofitable projects passing the benefit-cost tes

How Reliable are Meta-Analyses for International Benefit Transfers?

Meta-analysis has increasingly been used to synthesise the environmental valuation literature, but only a few test the use of these analyses for benefit transfer. These are typically based on national studies only. However, meta-analyses of valuation studies across countries are a potentially powerful tool for benefit transfer, especially for environmental goods where the domestic literature is scarce. We test the reliability of such international meta-analytic transfers, and find that even under conditions of homogeneity in valuation methods, cultural and institutional conditions across countries, and a meta-analysis with large explanatory power, the transfer errors could still be large. Further, international meta-analytic transfers do not on average perform better than simple value transfers averaging over domestic studies. Thus, we question whether the use of meta-analysis for practical benefit transfer achieves reliability gains justifying the increased effort. However, more meta-analytic benefit transfer tests should be performed for other environmental goods and other countries before discarding international meta-analysis as a tool for benefit transfer