Abstract
Abstract One of the first lessons in any economics course is that prices of substitute commodities matter. For example, the magnitude of estimated values for a specific recreation area may be substantially affected by the availability of substitute sites. This basic lesson of economics is often overlooked in the design of contingent‐valuation questions. Assumptions regarding the prices of substitutes become implicit in designing surveys and are rarely made explicit to survey respondents. In this article, hypotheses are formulated about hunter responses to contingent valuation questions under explicit and implicit assumptions regarding prices of substitute hunting opportunities. The hypotheses are tested using data from a statewide survey of Maine hunters. The results indicate that it may not be necessary to specify assumptions that prices of substitutes remain unchanged. In contrast, respondents did not change their statements of value when told that the prices of substitutes had doubled.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.