Abstract
This paper introduces a symposium on the issue of how stated preference (SP) research can best cope with 'anomalies' (i.e. systematic deviations from the predictions of standard economic theory) in survey responses. It proposes a framework for constructive debate, recognising (i) the legitimate aspirations of SP research, (ii) the relevance of evidence from sources other than best-practice SP, and (iii) the precautionary value of investigating strategies for coping with suspected anomalies, even if questions about the robustness of anomalies have not been finally resolved. Five alternative coping strategies, discussed in more detail in the symposium, are briefly introduced.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-12 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Environmental and Resource Economics |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Sept 2005 |
Keywords
- Stated preference
- contingent valuation
- anomalies
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver