EN中文

Acta Geographica Sinica >

2011 , Vol. 66 >Issue 2: 267 - 278

DOI: https://doi.org/10.11821/xb201102012

Bias Analysis and Reliability and Validity Test in Contingent Valuation Method:A Case Study of Assessment of Jiuzhaigou's Recreational Value

Expand
  • 1. Department of Land Resources and Tourism Sciences, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China;
    2. Institute of Agricultural Information, Zhejiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hangzhou 310021, China

Received date: 2010-02-21

  Revised date: 2010-09-23

  Online published: 2011-02-20

Supported by

British Academy, No.SG-47266; National Natural Science Foundation of China, No.40371030

Fold

Abstract

Contingent valuation method (CVM) is a valuation instrument for public goods on the basis of simulated market. However, its hypothesis arouses suspicions and controversies on its reliability and validity among academics. Combined with the literature review, this paper employs CVM to assess the recreational value of Jiuzhaigou and analyzes the biases in the survey. And finally, we conduct tests on test-retest reliability, content validity and convergent validity. It is found that (1) the recreational values of Jiuzhaigou in 2008 and 2009 are 333 million RMB yuan and 346 million RMB yuan respectively. Compared with other valuation results, these values are significantly lower; (2) the biases in CVM lie both in CVM itself and in the procedures where CVM is carried out. The former problems include hypothetical bias, information bias, protest response bias and strategic bias. The latter ones refer to questionnaire design, definition of population and samples, sampling methodology, and statistical analysis process; (3) the test on test-retest reliability indicates that this study is of high reliability; i.e. the valuation results are of high stability and repeatability; but the tests on content validity and convergent validity suggest low validity of the results and the fact that CVM tends to underestimate the value of tourist resources; (4) the development of CVM should shift gradually from case studies to validity and reliability tests. Thus, we have to establish and perfect the CVM implementation rules, which are suitable for developing countries to ensure validity and reliability of the valuation results.

Key words： contingent valuation method (CVM); value of the tourist resources; bias; reliability; validity; Jiuzhaigou

Cite this article

DONG Xuewang, ZHANG Jie, LIU Chuanhua, LI Min, ZHONG Shi'en . Bias Analysis and Reliability and Validity Test in Contingent Valuation Method:A Case Study of Assessment of Jiuzhaigou's Recreational Value[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2011 , 66(2) : 267 -278 . DOI: 10.11821/xb201102012

References

[1] Costanza R, d Arge R, de Groot R et al. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 1997, 387:253-260.



[2] OECD. The Economic Appraisal of Environmental Projects and Policies: A Practical Guide. Beijing: China EnvironmentalScience Press, 1996: 49-121. [经济合作与发展组织(OECD). 施涵、陈松译. 环境项目和政策的经济评价指南. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社, 1996: 49-121.]



[3] Ciriacy-Wantrup S V. Capital returns from soil-conservation practices. Journal of Farm Economics, 1947, 29: 1181-1196.



[4] Davis R K. Recreation planning as an economic problem. Natural Resourees Journal, 1963, (3): 239-249.



[5] Xue Dayuan. Economic Valuation of Biodiversity: A Case Study on Changbaishan Mountain Biosphere Reserve inNotheast China. Beijing: China Environmental Science Press, 1997. [薛达元. 生物多样性经济价值评估: 长白山自然保护区案例研究. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社, 1997.]



[6] Bai Mo. The study of contingent valuation method about economic evaluation of environment in Beijing [D]. Beijing:Peking University, 2001. [白墨. 北京市环境经济评估的意愿调查法研究[D]. 北京: 北京大学, 2001.]



[7] Zhang Zhiqiang, Xu Zhongmin, Cheng Guodong et al. Contingent valuation of the economic benefits of restoringecosystem services of Zhangye Prefecture of Heihe River Basin. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2002, 22(6): 885-893. [张志强, 徐中民, 程国栋等. 黑河流域张掖地区生态系统服务恢复的条件价值评估. 生态学报, 2002, 22(6): 885-893.]



[8] Xu Zhongmin, Zhang Zhiqiang, Cheng Guodong et al. Measuring the total economic value of restoring Ejina Banner'secosystem services. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2002, 57(1): 107-116. [徐中民, 张志强, 程国栋等. 额济纳旗生态系统恢复的总经济价值评估. 地理学报, 2002, 57(1): 107-116.]



[9] Chen Fu, Zhang Jie. Analysis on capitalization accounting of travel value: A case study of Jiuzhaigou scenic spot. Journalof Naijing University: Natural Sciences, 2001, 37(3): 296-304. [陈浮, 张捷. 旅游价值货币化核算研究: 九寨沟案例分析.南京大学学报: 自然科学版, 2001, 37(3): 296-304.]



[10] Guo Jianying, Wang Nai'ang. Evaluation of the non-use values of tourist resources of Dunhuang. Resources Science,2005, 27(5): 188-192. [郭剑英, 王乃昂. 敦煌旅游资源非使用价值评估. 资源科学, 2005, 27(5): 188-192.]



[11] Liu Yaping, Pan Xiaofang, Zhong Qiuping et al.. Analyzing about the assessment of the recreational value of the natural spaces inecotourism districts: Applying contingent valuation method and travel cost method to analyze the recreational value of WulingyuanScenic Resort.Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2006, 26(11): 3766-3774. [刘亚萍, 潘晓芳, 钟秋平等. 生态旅游区自然环境的游憩价值:运用条件价值评价法和旅行费用法对武陵源风景区进行实证分析. 生态学报, 2006, 26(11): 3766-3774.]



[12] Xu Lizhong, Wu Chunshan, Wang Feifeng et al.. Testing reliability of the contigent valuation method: A case study on thetourism attraction non-use value. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2007, 27(10): 4302-4309. [许丽忠, 吴春山, 王菲凤等. 条件价值法评估旅游资源非使用价值的可靠性检验. 生态学报, 2007, 27(10): 4302-4309.]



[13] Jia Quanxing. Study on method and application of tourism resource va1ue evaluation based on consumer surp1us [D].Chengdu: Southwest Jiaotong University, 2006. [贾全星. 基于消费者剩余的旅游资源价值评价方法及其应用研究[D].成都: 西南交通大学, 2006.]



[14] Zhang Jinquan. The study of tourism resource non-use va1ues for mountain Huangshan scenic spots based on CVM [D].Shanghai: Shanghai Normal University, 2007. [张金泉. 基于CVM的黄山旅游资源非使用价值评估研究[D]. 上海：上海师范大学, 2007.]



[15] Liu Caixia. The study of tourism resource economic va1ues for mountain Emei scenic spots [D]. Chengdu: SouthwestJiaotong University, 2008. [刘彩霞. 峨眉山风景名胜区旅游资源经济价值评估研究[D]. 成都：西南交通大学, 2008.]



[16] Guo Liang. The non-ues value assessment of Wudalianchi tourism resources [D]. Harbin: Harbin Institute of Technology,2007. [郭亮. 五大连池旅游资源非使用价值评估[D]. 哈尔滨: 哈尔滨工业大学, 2007.]



[17] Yu Wenwen. Application of Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) in valuing eco-tourism resources: A case study ofBeijing Botanical Garden [D]. Beijing: Capital Normal University, 2008. [于雯雯. CVM方法在生态旅游资源价值评估中的应用: 以北京植物园为例[D]. 北京: 首都师范大学, 2008.]



[18] Cai Yinying, Zhang Anlu. Measuring recreationa value and existence value of agricultura land in Shiliuhong leisure farmin Wuhan. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2008, 28(3): 1201-1209. [蔡银莺, 张安录. 武汉市石榴红农场休闲景观的游憩价值和存在价值估算. 生态学报, 2008, 28(3): 1201-1209.]



[19] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Report of the NOAA Panel on Ccontingent Valuation. FederalRegister, 1993, 58(10): 4601-4614.



[20] Ruijgrok E C M. The three economic values of cultural heritage: A case study in the Netherlands. Journal of CulturalHeritage, 2006, 7: 206-213.



[21] Kim S S, Wong K K F, Cho M. Assessing the economic value of a world heritage site and willingness-to-pay determinants: A case of Changdeok Palace. Tourism Management, 2007, 28: 317-322.



[22] Dutta M, Banerjee S, Husain Z. Untapped demand for heritage: A contingent valuation study of Prinsep Ghat, Calcutta.Tourism Management, 2007, 28: 83-95.



[23] Tuan T H, Navrud S. Capturing the benefits of preserving cultural heritage. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2008, 9: 326-337.



[24] Verbic M, Slabe-Erker R. An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: A case study of theVolcji Potok landscape area. Ecological Economics, 2009, 68: 1316-1328.



[25] Del Saz Salazar S, Montagud Marques J. Valuing cultural heritage: The social benefits of restoring and old Arab tower.Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2005, 6: 69-77.



[26] Carson R T. Contingent Valuation: A user's guide. Environmental Sciences and Technology, 2000, 34: 1413-1418.



[27] Xu Zhongmin, Zhang Zhiqiang, Cheng Guodong. The updated development and application of contigent valuation method(CVM). Advances in Earth Science, 2003, 18(3): 455-462. [徐中民, 张志强, 程国栋. 条件价值评估法的发展与应用. 地球科学进展, 2003, 18(3): 455-462.]



[28] Zhang Yin, Cai Yunlong. Using contingent valuation method to value environmental resources: A review. ActaScientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis, 2005, 41(2): 317-328. [张茵, 蔡运龙. 条件估值法评估环境资源价值的研究进展. 北京大学学报: 自然科学版, 2005, 41(2): 317-328]



[29] Zhang Yifei, Zhao Min. Review on the validity and reliability of CVM in evaluation of ecosystem service and a case design study. Advances in Earth Science, 2007, 22(11): 1141-1149. [张翼飞, 赵敏. 意愿价值法评估生态服务价值的有效性与可靠性及实例设计研究. 地球科学进展, 2007, 22(11): 1141-1149.]



[30] Li Wei, Li Wenjun. Using a modified travel cost method to evaluate the recreational benefits of Jiuzhaigou nature reserve.Acta Scicentiarum Naturalum Universitis Pekinesis, 2003, 39(4): 548-555. [李巍, 李文军. 用改进的旅行费用法评估九寨沟的游憩价值. 北京大学学报: 自然科学版, 2003, 39(4): 548-555.]



[31] Zhang Yin, Cai Yunlong. Using a multiple-destination-based zonal travel cost method to evaluate the recreational benefits ofJiuzhaigou Nature Reserve. Journal of Natural Resources, 2004, 19(5): 651-661. [张茵, 蔡运龙. 基于分区的多目的地TCM模型及其在游憩资源价值评估中的应用: 以九寨沟自然保护区为例. 自然资源学报, 2004, 19(5): 651-661.]



[32] Venkatachalam L. The contingent valuation method:Areview. Environmental ImpactAssessment Review, 2004, 24: 89-124.



[33] Nyborg K. Homo economics and homo politicus: Interpretation and aggregation of environmental values. Journal ofEconomic Behavior & Organization, 2000, 42: 305-322.



[34] Faber M, Petersen T, Schiller J. Homo economics and homo politics in ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 2002, 40:323-333.



[35] Zhang Jie, Nie Xianzhong, Li Shengfeng. Significance of karst research to local tourism in Jiuzhaigou conservation.Carsologica Sinica, 1997, 16(4): 386-392. [张捷, 聂献忠, 李升峰. 九寨沟自然保护区喀斯特研究的旅游业意义. 中国岩溶, 1997, 16(4): 386-392.]



[36] Carson R T, Flores N E, Meade N F. Contingent valuation: Controversies and evidence. Environmental and ResourceEconomics, 2001, 19: 173-210.



[37] Cummings R G, Borokshire D S, Schulze W D. Valuing the environmenatl goods: A state of the arts assessment of thecontingent valuation. Totowa, NJ: Roweman and Allnaheld, 1986.



[38] Bateman I J, Turner R K. Valuation of environment, methods and techniques: the contingent valuation method//Turner RK. Sustainable Environmental Economices and Management: Principles and Practice. London: Belhaven Press, 1993:120-191.



[39] Zhao Jun, Yang Kai. Valuation of natural resources and environment: Contingent valuation method and its applicationprinciples in China. Journal of Natural Resources, 2006, 21(5): 834-843. [赵军, 杨凯. 自然资源与环境价值评估: 条件估值法及应用原则探讨. 自然资源学报, 2006, 21(5): 834-843]



[40] Scheaffer R L, MendenhallW, Ott R L. Elementary Survey Sampling. 6th ed. Boston: Duxbury Press, 2006: 126.



[41] Mitchell R C, Carson R T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington DC:Resources for the Future, 1989.



[42] Babbie E. Qiu Zeqi trans. The Practice of Social Research. 8th ed.Wedsworth Inc., 2000. [艾尔·巴比著, 邱泽奇译. 社会研究方法. 北京: 华夏出版社, 2002: 95-98.]



[43] Loomis J B, Bateman I. Some empirical evidence on embedding effect in contingent valuation of forest protection. Journalof Environmental Economics and Management, 1993, 24(1): 45-55.



[44] Bateman I J, Carson R T, Day B et al. Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: A manual. Northampton,MA, USA: Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2002.



[45] Bailey K D. Methods of Social Research. New York: The Free Press, 1982. [肯尼思·D·贝利著(1982). 许真译. 现代社会研究方法. 上海: 上海人民出版社, 1986: 90-101.]



[46] Knetsch J L, Davis R K. Comparisons of methods for resource evaluation//Kneese A V, Smith S C. Water Research.Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press/Resources for the Future, 1966.



[47] Carson R T, Flores N E, Martin K M et al.Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: Comparing theestimates for quasi-public goods. Land Economics, 1996, 71(l): 80-99.



[48] Chaudhry P, Tewari V P. A comparison between TCM and CVM in assessing the recreational use value of urban forestry.International Forestry Review, 2006, 8(4): 439-448.
Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉