Can Contingent Valuation Distinguish Economic Values for Different Public Goods?
通过随机电话调查，测试条件价值评估法能否区分显著与次要公共项目的经济价值，发现受访者能清晰区分并表现出不同的支付意愿。
This paper reports the first test evaluating whether stated choices as part of a contingent valuation survey discriminate between significant and trivial causes. Using a random digit dialed sample for North Carolina, two different plans were posed to respondents-one to expand a popular North Carolina highway flower planting program nationwide and a second to facilitate the use of recycled tires in making asphalt for highways. Random assignment, identical payment mechanisms, and overall question designs were used. The results indicate clear discrimination in choices, choice functions, and the estimated willingness to pay for the two plans.