Better than their reputation - a case for mail surveys in contingent valuation.

Publication Type

Journal contribution (peer reviewed)

Authors

AHLHEIM, M., EKASINGH, B., FRÖR, O., KITCHAICHAROEN, J., NEEF, A., SANGKAPITUX, C., SINPHURMSUKSKUL, N.

Year of publication

2010

Published in

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

Band/Volume

53/2

DOI

10.1080/09640560903529196

Page (from - to)

163-182

Although contingent valuation is the dominant technique for the valuation of public projects, especially in the environmental sector, the high costs of contingent valuation surveys prevent the use of this method for the assessment of relatively small projects. The reason for this cost problem is that typically only contingent valuation studies which are based on face-to-face interviews are accepted as leading to valid results. Particularly in countries with high wages, face-to-face surveys are extremely costly considering that for a valid contingent valuation study a minimum of 1000 completed face-to-face interviews is required. This paper tries a rehabilitation of mail surveys as low-budget substitutes for costly face-to-face surveys. Based on an empirical contingent valuation study in Northern Thailand, it is shown that the validity of mail surveys can be improved significantly if so-called Citizen Expert Groups are employed for a thorough survey design.