Advanced
search

To read this content please select one of the options below:

A comparison of mode effects between face-to-face and drop-off contingent valuation surveys

Hua Ma (State key laboratory of petroleum resources and prospecting AND; Department of Geochemistry and Environmental Sciences, College of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum, Beijing Campus, Beijing, China)
Hui Liu (Department of Geochemistry and Environmental Sciences, College of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum, Beijing Campus, Beijing, China)
Yazhen Gong (School of Environment and Natural Resources, Renmin University of China, Beijing, China)
Jianjun Jin (College of Resources Science & Technology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China)
Xianqiang Mao (School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China)

China Agricultural Economic Review

ISSN: 1756-137X

Article publication date: 7 September 2015

375

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine the practice potential of self-administered drop-off as a survey mode for contingent valuation (CV) studies.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper conducts an empirical comparison of mode effects of two survey methods for improved ecological services in Beijing. Data were collected from a CV survey, which has two subsamples, one using face-to-face interviews and the other employing self-administered drop-off surveys.

Findings

There is some evidence of social desirability bias in the face-to-face interviews for the participation question; however, such effects do not carry over to subjects’ responses to the contribution decision. No difference is observed in sample demographics between modes. And satisficing effect is not observed in the drop-off survey in this study.

Research limitations/implications

More well-controlled mode comparisons are warranted to test the robustness of the results; and collection time effects as well as the use of drop-off surveys for environmental valuation with different levels of complexity and familiarity are worthy of further study.

Practical implications

The authors find more similarities between drop-off and face-to-face surveys than differences therefore support the practice of self-administered drop-off surveys in CVM for environmental valuation.

Originality/value

This paper adds to the limited number of well-controlled mode comparisons in the CV surveys, and contributes to a better understanding of self-administered drop-off surveys, a potential low-cost alternative to face-to-face interviews in future CV applications.

Keywords

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge grants from the Environment and Economy Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), as part of the EEPSEA-China In-Country Small Research Grant Program for Environmental and Natural Resource Economics (No. 105920-00001003-016) for funding the study design, data collection and analysis, results; and also grants from the Science Foundation of China University of Petroleum, Beijing (No. KYJJ2012-01-26) for funding the discussion and submission. The authors are also grateful to two anonymous reviewers, the editor, Professor Wiktor Adamowicz and Professor Peter Martinsson for valuable comments. All errors remain the authors ' own.

Citation

Ma, H., Liu, H., Gong, Y., Jin, J. and Mao, X. (2015), "A comparison of mode effects between face-to-face and drop-off contingent valuation surveys", China Agricultural Economic Review, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 510-527. https://doi.org/10.1108/CAER-01-2014-0010

Publisher

:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2015, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Related articles

Manage cookies

We’re listening — tell us what you think

Join us on our journey