Adding other methods with Choice Experiment

[Joy_Lawrence]

Good evening, I have got three questions:

1) Can we have both contingent valuation models [like eg. double bounded dichotomous choice or payment vehicle method] with a discrete choice experiment? Where the first DBDC method tries to know the wtp for only one attribute out of the 5 attributes in the next choice experiment. But with screening questions with slightly separate scenario descriptions. Will doing this influence the choice experiment ? Is it allowed?
2)If not or if other than DBDC type models, you have recommendation of some better alternative methods for doing a wtp study that can be used before choice experiment or simultaneously with it? to be used

3)Can we do such a DBDC study using NGENE and Survey engine? Or are they suited only for DCE?

Thank you so much for your reply.

[Michiel Bliemer]

I am not familiar with DBDC but from reading: '"For double-bounded dichotomous choice CVM, respondents are asked whether they are willing to pay or not at presented price. If a respondent accepts to pay the price, the higher price is displayed next. If a respondent rejects to pay the price, the lower price is displayed."
If this is the case, then there is no underlying experimental design as the price level simply goes up or down based on the previous response. Therefore, Ngene would not be needed. SurveyEngine is a general survey tool so you should be able to use it for DBDC.

You are allowed to do anything, but you indeed need to consider the influence on the choice experiment. You could consider segmenting your population, some get DBDC before the choice experiment and some after, so that you can test any influence.

In my domain (transport), contingent valuation is not really accepted as a valid method for eliciting willingness-to-pay, so it is hardly used, but it may be different in your field.

Michiel

[Joy_Lawrence]

Thank you for your reply.
---Is there any reason why in transport these approaches are not valid/accepted? Are they considered outdated methods? My area of work is on Electric Vehicle Charging Technology. Not sure if the same applies to this area as well.
I wanted to use another WTP method apart from choice experiment just so that we could know how willing they are for just one particular attribute and then compare it with the choice experiment results.
But the influence on their choices is something we need to beware of. Thank you for the recommendation to disaggregate them.

----Another method (not DBDC) that I was alternatively thinking about (as a combination with choice experiment) was a ''Yes/No/Unsure'' kind of voting /bidding method question to a set or increasing prices (applied through randomized bidding).
Is this a method that you might know to be considered valid or could be used in my kind of area of research?

I have seen this method in studies, for example titled ''consumer wtp for a resilient electrical grid'' (lambert et al, 2024) which is somewhat closer to our interest in their wtp for vehicle charging based on solar.

Thank you for guiding.

[Michiel Bliemer]

Directly asking respondents how much they value a certain non-market good, e.g. "how much are you willing to pay for saving 5 Mt of CO2 emissions?", is often considered too difficult of a question to ask respondents. Bidding methods with prices would also be directly asking respondents to put a price on something, so that would suffer from the same directness as CV. Choice experiments INDIRECTLY elicit WTP and is generally seen as a superior method to CV. But of course, if you do both CV and choice experiments you can compare the results and that would still be interesting.

In transport, quantities like the value of travel time is generally determined based on choice experiments, not on CV. CV seems more applied in environmental economics.

Michiel