doi:10.1006jeem.2001.1210 Alternative Non-market Value-Elicitation Methods: Are the Underlying Preferences the Same?1

We advocate a more formal structural approach for comparing WTP for non-market or pre-test-market goods conveyed by fundamentally different preference elicitation mecha-nisms. Seven independent samples of respondents were asked to value the identical good. Elicitation methods include one actual purchase and six widely used hypothetical choice Ž.formats. Using a common underlying indirect utility function and stochastic structure allows Ždata for different elicitation methods to be used independently, compared pair-wise as in.much of the earlier literature or pooled across all samples in one unified model with heteroscedasticity across elicitation methods. Our differences in estimated WTP for the individual models are typical of earlier findings. However, pooled-data models that allow for heteroscedasticity reveal that while there are substantial differences in the amount of noise in the different samples, a common underlying systematic component of the preference struc-Ž.ture cannot be rejected for at least four and possibly five of these seven elicitation methods. Ž. 2002 Elsevier Science USA Key Words: statedrevealed preference; non-market value elicitation; referendum contin-gent valuation; open-ended; payment card; multiple-bounded; conjoint analysis; willingness to pay; scale factor; telephonemail survey