This paper offers an alternative interpretation of the conclusions Kahneman and Knetsch propose based on two contingent valuation (CVM) surveys. The evaluation argues that while framing is important to CVM estimates, the design, implementation, and empirical findings reported from these surveys do not support their judgments. Moreover, with the exception of temporal embedding, conventional economic descriptions of individual behavior can explain the response patterns that they suggest are at variance with standard value theory.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Economics and Econometrics
- Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law