You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Comparing Choice Question Formats for Evaluating Natural Resource Tradeoffs
William S. Breffle and Robert D. Rowe
Vol. 78, No. 2 (May, 2002), pp. 298-314
Published by: University of Wisconsin Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3147275
Page Count: 17
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Natural resources, Bays, Statistical variance, Wetlands, Tradeoffs, Economic costs, Surface runoff, Land economics, Sample size, Statistical models
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Choice questions are increasingly being used to scale competing natural resource programs. Respondents choose between two alternatives with varying levels of program characteristics and costs. Complexity in the choice task can increase the randomness (variance) in the choices and the estimation of preferences, and the magnitude of randomness is examined using scope tests and scale parameters. We provide an empirical comparison of response variance from three formats. A simple resource-to-resource format appears superior to simple referendum and composite formats in terms of coherence. The application stems from a study addressing PCB-caused natural resource losses in Green Bay, Wisconsin.
Land Economics © 2002 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System