@article{Rolfe:58204,
      recid = {58204},
      author = {Rolfe, John and Bennett, Jeffrey W.},
      title = {WTP and WTA in relation to irrigation development in the  Fitzroy Basin, Queensland},
      address = {2003-02},
      number = {414-2016-26130},
      pages = {16},
      year = {2003},
      abstract = {Estimates of the compensating surplus generated by changes  in non-marketed environmental amenities can be estimated  using stated preference valuation techniques. These are  typically framed in terms of WTP tradeoffs, even if the  situation of interest involves a property right vestment  that calls for a WTA question. The differences created by  the two questioning formats are explored in this paper  using the results of two choice modelling applications.  Both applications were framed on the potential for  irrigation development and environmental losses in the  Fitzroy River Basin, Central Queensland. The scenarios used  in the applications differed only in that they used  alternatively WTP and WTA questioning formats. The results  indicate that robust models could not be constructed from  either WTP- or WTA-based data sets when only two  alternatives were used in the choice sets. In contrast, a  strongly fitting model was derived from WTP-based data  where three alternatives formed the choice sets.},
      url = {http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/58204},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.58204},
}