A Comparison of Contingent Valuation Method and Random Utility Model Estimates of the Value Of Avoiding Reductions In King Mackerel Bag Limits

ASU Author/Contributor (non-ASU co-authors, if there are any, appear on document)
John Whitehead Ph.D., Professor & Department Chair (Creator)
Institution
Appalachian State University (ASU )
Web Site: http://www.library.appstate.edu/

Abstract: This paper estimates the value of king mackerel bag limit changes with both stated and revealed preference methods. The 1997 Marine Recreational Fishery Statistical Survey allows estimation of the value of avoiding bag limit reductions with the random utility model and the contingent valuation method. Using the contingent valuation method, the willingness to pay to avoid a one fish reduction in the bag limit is $2.45 per year. Using the random utility model, the willingness to pay to avoid a one fish reduction in the bag limit is $2.24 per trip and $7.71 for a two-month time period. Considering several methodological issues, the difference in willingness to pay between the stated and revealed preference methods is in the expected direction.

Additional Information

Publication
Whitehead, John C. (2006) A Comparison of Contingent Valuation Method and Random Utility Model Estimates of the Value Of Avoiding Reductions In King Mackerel Bag Limits, Applied Economics, 38(15):1725-1736. Published by Taylor & Francis (ISSN: 0003-6846).
Language: English
Date: 2006