I didn't revise the paper for this journal but here is what I wanted to say ..read more

It was around this time that I may have decided it wasn't such a great idea to engage with a more multi-disciplinary audience.  there in 2002 and received an R&R. Here is the response to the referees ..read more

on April 02, 2024 at 11:48 AM in ..read more

Abstract: We use the contingent valuation method in a survey of Great Lakes anglers to estimate the willingness to pay for a Great Lakes recreational fishing trip. Employing various assumptions and models, we find that the willingness to pay for a trip ranges from $54 to $101 ($2020). We then combine the willingness to pay per trip estimates with an estimate of the number of trips and find that the aggregate economic value of Great Lakes fishing trips in the U.S. is $611 million. We conduct a sensitivity analysis over the estimates of willingness to pay and the number of trips and estimate tha ..read more

Key Words: Attribute non-attendance, Hypothetical bias, Scope test, Willingess to pay ..read more

Abstract: Desvousges, Mathews and Train (2020) point out a mistake in my comment on their 2015 paper. When this mistake is corrected the conclusions drawn in my comment are unchanged. In addition, the authors claim that I make another 11 “mistakes”. In this paper I argue that these “mistakes” are mostly fairly standard practice in the contingent valuation method. Desvousges, Mathews and Train misread and distort this literature. In addition, I place the comments and reply in the context of a larger debate over using the Contingent Valuation Method for Natural Resource Damage Assessment ..read more

on January 17, 2024 at 09:25 AM in ..read more

Many contingent valuation method researchers use the nonparametrice Turnbull WTP estimates for hypothesis testing. This is inappropriate when the data must be "pooled" to get the willingness to pay (e.g., the "vote in favor" variable) to decrease with the cost amount. Sometimes, due to small samples, poorly chosen cost amounts or respondent inattentiveness, the percentage of “vote in favor” responses is not monotonically decreasing with the cost amount. The Turnbull estimator requires that the “vote in favor” responses are pooled over prices until the pooled responses are monotonically decreas ..read more

**Not that we had enough money for "best practices" for this paper ..read more

[1] This study was funded by the Walker College of Business Dean's Club. It was conducted with a student at Appalachian State University who was going to use it for an Honors Thesis. The student ghosted on us and we're left with the responsibility of producing a poster for the Dean's Club poster session (a requirement for securing Dean's Club funding).  ..read more