Files
Abstract
Rather than individual consumer preferences, responses to referendum-style contingent
valuation surveys on environmental goods may express citizen assessments that take
into account benefits to others. We reconsider the consumer versus citizen hypothesis
with a focus on the role of framing information. Survey data on conservation areas in
Ilomantsi, Finland, are used. Different versions of the valuation question were used to
encourage the respondents to take the consumer or the citizen role. The citizen version
expectedly resulted in substantially fewer zero-WTP responses and protests and higher
mean and median WTP, suggesting that the framing information has a major effect on
the preferences expressed. The findings support the idea of multiple preferences. For a
more confident interpretation of contingent valuation responses, future studies should
recognise their intended use in survey design and gain information about respondents’
motives to determine the presence and type of altruistic motives.