A Comparison of Contingent Preference Models

Abstract

Abstract I compare the informational efficiencies of contingent rating, contingent ranking, and two contingent paired‐comparison methods as alternatives to the referendum contingent valuation method. The contingent rating method is hypothesized to be most efficient because ratings convey information on preference intensities and can uniquely represent respondent indifference or ambivalence. Survey data on hunters' ratings of alternative hypothetical hunting trips are used to estimate four alternative indirect utility models from which marginal willingness‐to‐pay measures for individual trip attributes are derived. Model comparison, WTP estimates, and their confidence intervals confirm the relative efficiency of the contingent rating approach.