Estrategias para el fortalecimiento y fiabilidad del método de valoración contingente, análisis de la encuesta como herramienta de recolección de información

Vista sencilla de ítem
dc.contributor.advisorVargas Osorio, Juan Jose
dc.contributor.authorPirachican Urrea, Jorge David
dc.contributor.authorMunevar Rodriguez, German Gustavo
dc.contributor.cvlachttp://scienti.colciencias.gov.co:8081/cvlac/visualizador/generarCurriculoCv.do?cod_rh=0001402751
dc.contributor.googlescholarhttps://scholar.google.com/citations?user=tg9vauEAAAAJ&hl=es
dc.contributor.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1416-9467
dc.date.accessioned2020-08-03T18:41:09Z
dc.date.available2020-08-03T18:41:09Z
dc.date.issued2020-07-19
dc.descriptionLa principal herramienta de recolección de información que se implementa en la valoración contingente es la encuesta tradicional, la cual está sujeta a varias críticas por los sesgos y errores que pueden interferir en el cálculo de la disponibilidad a pagar (DAP) de los encuestados. Este documento recopila las principales críticas al método de valoración contingente (MVC) para conocer los principales errores de la aplicación del método y describe algunas de las principales soluciones a los mismos, además de mencionar algunas de las nuevas y empíricas herramientas de recolección de información de los encuestados que aumentan así la fiabilidad y certeza de la valoración contingente en valores de no uso.spa
dc.description.abstractThe main information collection tool that is implemented in the contingent valuation is the traditional survey, which is subject to various criticisms for biases and errors that may interfere with the calculation of the respondents' availability to pay (WTP). This document compiles the main criticisms of the contingent valuation method (CVM) to know the main errors of the application of the method and describes some of the main solutions to them, in addition to mentioning some of the new empirical tools for collecting information from respondents that increase the reliability and certainty of the contingent valuation in non-use values.spa
dc.description.degreelevelPregradospa
dc.description.degreenameIngeniero Ambientalspa
dc.description.domainhttp://unidadinvestigacion.usta.edu.cospa
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.citationMunevar, G. G. & Pirachican,J. D. (2020). Estrategias para el fortalecimiento y fiabilidad del método de valoración contingente, análisis de la encuesta como herramienta de recolección de información [Trabajo de grado pregrado de Ingeniería ambiental] Universidad Santo Tomás. Bogotá, Colombia.spa
dc.identifier.instnameinstname:Universidad Santo Tomásspa
dc.identifier.reponamereponame:Repositorio Institucional Universidad Santo Tomásspa
dc.identifier.repourlrepourl:https://repository.usta.edu.cospa
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11634/28775
dc.language.isospa
dc.publisherUniversidad Santo Tomásspa
dc.publisher.branchCRAI-USTA Bogotáspa
dc.publisher.facultyFacultad de Ingeniería Ambientalspa
dc.publisher.programPregrado de Ingeniería Ambientalspa
dc.relation.referencesAgüero, A. A., Yazlle, L. L., Sauad, J. J., & Carral, M. (2005). Aplicación del método de valoración contingente en la evaluación del sistema de gestión de residuos sólidos domiciliarios en la ciudad de Salta, Argentina.spa
dc.relation.referencesBoyle, K. J. (1989). Commodity specification and the framing of contingent-valuation questions. Land Economics, 65(1), 57-63. http://www.econis.eu/PPNSET?PPN=259430633spa
dc.relation.referencesBravo-Moncayo, L., Lucio Naranjo, J., Pavón García, I., & Mosquera, R. (2017). Neural based contingent valuation of road traffic noise. Transportation Research Part D, 50, 26-39.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2016.10.020spa
dc.relation.referencesCárdenas, G., Vargas, A., & Díaz, D. (2019). Un no como respuesta: interpretación, tratamiento y análisis en estudios de valoración contingente. Cuadernos de Economía, 38(77), 209 - 236. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324485545spa
dc.relation.referencesCarson, R. T. (2012). Contingent valuation. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(4), 27-42.http://www.econis.eu/PPNSET?PPN=737234083spa
dc.relation.referencesCollins, A. R., & Rosenberger, R. S. (2007). Protest adjustments in the valuation of watershed restoration using payment card data. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 36(2), 321 - 335. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1068280500007127spa
dc.relation.referencesCummings, R. G. (1998). Does realism matter in contingent valuation surveys? Land Economics, 74(2), 203-215. http://www.econis.eu/PPNSET?PPN=261247468spa
dc.relation.referencesDaniel McFadden. (1994). Contingent valuation and social choice. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 76(4), 689-708. doi:10.2307/1243732spa
dc.relation.referencesRevista Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica (REVIBEC), 2, (37)- 44. http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=2162684spa
dc.relation.referencesAzqueta Oyarzun, D. (1994). Valoración económica de la calidad ambiental. http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/009179881spa
dc.relation.referencesBassili, J. N., & Fletcher, J. F. (1991). Response - time measurement in survey research: A method for CATI and a new look at nonattitudes. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 55(3),331.https://search.proquest.com/docview/1296989331spa
dc.relation.referencesBautista, B. A. (2016). Formulación de una herramienta de recolección de información para establecer la disponibilidad a pagar de la explotación de coltán por valoración contingente en el municipio de Cumaribo, Vichada-Colombia.http://hdl.handle.net/10654/15570.spa
dc.relation.referencesBennett, J. W., Morrison, M. D., & Blamey, R. K. (1999). Yea-saying in contingent valuation surveys. Land Economics, 75(1), 126-141. http://econpapers.repec.org/article/uwplandec/v_3a75_3ay_3a1999_3ai_3a1_3ap_3a126-141.htmspa
dc.relation.referencesBerta Martín-López, Carlos Montes, & Javier Benayas. (2008). Economic valuation of biodiversity conservation: The meaning of numbers. Conservation Biology, 22(3), 624-635.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00921.xspa
dc.relation.referencesBorzykowski, N., Baranzini, A., & Maradan, D. (2018). Scope Effects in Contingent Valuation: Does the Assumed Statistical Distribution of WTP Matter? Ecological Economics, 144, 319–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.09.005spa
dc.relation.referencesEdwards, S. F. (1987). Overlooked biases in contingent valuation surveys. Land Economics, 63(2), 168 - 178. http://www.econis.eu/PPNSET?PPN=25904623Xspa
dc.relation.referencesEkstrand, E. R., & Loomis, J. (1998). Incorporating respondent uncertainty when estimating willingness to pay for protecting critical habitat for threatened and endangered fish. Water Resources Research, 34(11), 3149-3155.https://doi.org/10.1029/98WR02164spa
dc.relation.referencesEye-tracking data: New insights on response order effects and other cognitive shortcuts in survey responding. (2008). Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(5), 892-913. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1835551608spa
dc.relation.referencesFraser, I., & Balcombe, K. G. (2009). Dichotomous-choice contingent valuation with 'dont know' responses and misreporting. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 24(7), 1137-1152.http://econpapers.repec.org/article/jaejapmet/v_3a24_3ay_3a2009_3ai_3a7_3ap_3a1137-1152.htmspa
dc.relation.referencesGarzón, L. P. (2013). Revisión del método de valoración contingente: experiencias de la aplicación en áreas protegidas de América Latina y el Caribe. Espacio y Desarrollo, (25), 65.http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/espacioydesarrollo/article/view/10623spa
dc.relation.referencesGordillo, F., Elsasser, P., & Günter, S. (2019). Willingness to pay for forest conservation in ecuador: Results from a nationwide contingent valuation survey in a combined “referendum” – “Consequential open-ended” design. Forest Policy and Economics, 105, 28-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.05.002spa
dc.relation.referencesGregg, D., & Wheeler, S. A. (2018). How can we value an environmental asset that very few have visited or heard of? lessons learned from applying contingent and inferred valuation in an australian wetlands case study. Journal of Environmental Management, 220, 207-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.04.116spa
dc.relation.referencesHanemann, W. M. (1994). Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(4), 19-43. http://econpapers.repec.org/article/aeajecper/v_3a8_3ay_3a1994_3ai_3a4_3ap_3a19-43.htmspa
dc.relation.referencesHausman, J. (2012). Contingent valuation. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(4), 43-56.http://www.econis.eu/PPNSET?PPN=737234148spa
dc.relation.referencesHausman, J. A., & Diamond, P. A. (1994). Contingent valuation: Is some number better than no number? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(4), 45 - 64. http://econpapers.repec.org/article/aeajecper/v_3a8_3ay_3a1994_3ai_3a4_3ap_3a45-64.htmspa
dc.relation.referencesHorowitz, J. K. (1993). A new model of contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 75(5), 1268. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1296552723spa
dc.relation.referencesJohn M. Heyde. (1995). Is contingent valuation worth the trouble? The University of Chicago Law Review, 62(1), 331-362. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclrev/vol62/iss1/6spa
dc.relation.referencesLi, T., & Gao, X. (2016). Ecosystem services valuation of lakeside wetland park beside chaohu lake in china. Water, 8(7), 301. https://doi.org/10.3390/w8070301 Lusk, J. L., & Norwood, F. B. (2009). An inferred valuation method. Land Economics, 85(3), 500 - 514. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27759692spa
dc.relation.referencesMartin Johnson. (2004). Timepieces: Components of survey question response latencies. Political Psychology, 25(5), 679-702. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3792339spa
dc.relation.referencesMyklebust, T. Å, Aagnes, B., & Møller, B. (2016). An empirical comparison of methods for predicting net survival. Cancer Epidemiology, 42, 133-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2016.04.006spa
dc.relation.referencesBaron, A., & Flórez, R. C. (2012). Implementación de la metodología de valoración contingente para la estimación de la disponibilidad a pagar por las áreas verdes urbanas de Bogotá. https://hdl.handle.net/11634/2627spa
dc.relation.referencesNowell, C. R. (1988). Length-biased sampling in contingent valuation studies. Land Economics, 64(4), 367-371. Retrieved from http://www.econis.eu/PPNSET?PPN=259373486spa
dc.relation.referencesOerlemans, L. A. G., Chan, K.-Y., & Volschenk, J. (2016). Willingness to pay for green electricity: A review of the contingent valuation literature and its sources of error. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 66, 875 – 885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.08.054spa
dc.relation.referencesPu, S., Shao, Z., Yang, L., Liu, R., Bi, J., & Ma, Z. (2019). How much will the chinese public pay for air pollution mitigation? a nationwide empirical study based on a willingness-to-pay scenario and air purifier costs. Journal of Cleaner Production, 218, 51-60.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.270spa
dc.relation.referencesRiera P., (1994). Manual de valoración contingente. Madrid: Instituto de Estudios Fiscales. Ruiz, T., & Bernabé, J. C. (2014). Measuring factors influencing valuation of non motorized improvement measures. Transportation Research Part A, 67, 195-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2014.06.008spa
dc.relation.referencesRuiz, T., & Bernabé, J. C. (2014). Measuring factors influencing valuation of non motorized improvement measures. Transportation Research Part A, 67, 195-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2014.06.008spa
dc.relation.referencesSkeie, M. A., Lindhjem, H., Skjeflo, S., & Navrud, S. (2019). Smartphone and tablet effects in contingent valuation web surveys – no reason to worry? Ecological Economics, 165,106390.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106390spa
dc.relation.referencesSniderman, P., & Grob, D. B. (1996). Innovations in experimental design in attitude surveys. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 377. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1750822343spa
dc.relation.referencesSpash, C. L. (2006). Non - economic motivation for contingent values: Rights and attitudinal beliefs in the willingness to pay for environmental improvements. Land Economics, 82(4), 602-622. https://doi.org/10.3368/le.82.4.602spa
dc.relation.referencesDrayer, J., & Shapiro, S. L. (2011). An examination into the factors that influence consumers’ perceptions of value. Sport Management Review, 14(4), 389 – 398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2010.11.001spa
dc.relation.referencesStevens, T. H. (1997). Sensitivity of contingent valuation to alternative payment schedules. Land Economics, 73(1), 140-148. http://www.econis.eu/PPNSET?PPN=260948195spa
dc.relation.referencesSvedsäter, H. (2003). Economic valuation of the environment: How citizens make sense of contingent valuation questions. Land Economics, 79(1), 122-135. http://econpapers.repec.org/article/uwplandec/v_3a79_3ay_3a2003_3ai_3a1_3ap_3a122-135.htmspa
dc.relation.referencesSzabó, Z. (2011). Reducing protest responses by deliberative monetary valuation: Improving the validity of biodiversity valuation. Ecological Economics, 72, 37-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.09.025spa
dc.relation.referencesTimothy C. Haab, Matthew G. Interis, Daniel R. Petrolia, & John C. Whitehead. (2013). From hopeless to curious? thoughts on hausman's "dubious to hopeless" critique of contingent valuation. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 35(4), 593-612. https://doi.org/10.1093/aepp/ppt029.spa
dc.relation.referencesChamp, P. A., Flores, N. E., Brown, T. C., & Chivers, J. (2002). Contingent Valuation and Incentives. Land Economics, 78(4), 591–604. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3146855spa
dc.relation.referencesVondolia, G. K., Eggert, H., Navrud, S., & Stage, J. (2014). What do respondents bring to contingent valuation? A comparison of monetary and labour payment vehicles. Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, 3(3),253 - 267. https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep14953spa
dc.relation.referencesWillis, K. G., & Powe, N. A. (1998). Contingent valuation and real economic commitments: A private good experiment. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 41(5), 611-619. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640569811489spa
dc.relation.referencesZhang, L., Fukuda, H., & Liu, Z. (2019). Households' willingness to pay for green roof for mitigating heat island effects in beijing (china). Building and Environment, 150, 13-20.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.12.048spa
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 2.5 Colombia
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.rights.localAbierto (Texto Completo)spa
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/co/
dc.subject.keywordEconomic Assessment, Survey, Bias, Availability to Pay, Non-Use Values.spa
dc.subject.keywordEconomic assessmentspa
dc.subject.keywordSurveyspa
dc.subject.keywordBiasspa
dc.subject.keywordAvailability to Payspa
dc.subject.keywordMethodologies -- Information Collectionspa
dc.subject.lembEncuestaspa
dc.subject.lembEvaluación económicaspa
dc.subject.lembMetodologías -- Recolección de informaciónspa
dc.subject.proposalSesgospa
dc.subject.proposalDisponibilidad a Pagarspa
dc.subject.proposalValores de no usospa
dc.titleEstrategias para el fortalecimiento y fiabilidad del método de valoración contingente, análisis de la encuesta como herramienta de recolección de informaciónspa
dc.typebachelor thesis
dc.type.categoryFormación de Recurso Humano para la Ctel: Trabajo de grado de Pregradospa
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_7a1f
dc.type.coarversionhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_ab4af688f83e57aa
dc.type.driveinfo:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis
dc.type.localTesis de pregradospa
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion

Archivos

Bloque original

Mostrando 1 - 4 de 4
Miniatura
Nombre:
2020germanmunevar.pdf
Tamaño:
229.91 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descripción:
Descargar
Miniatura
Nombre:
2020DavidPirachican2.pdf
Tamaño:
305.85 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descripción:
Carta de Aprobación Facultad Ingeniería Ambiental
Descargar
Miniatura
Nombre:
2020DavidPirachican3.pdf
Tamaño:
124.46 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descripción:
Carta derechos de Autor
Descargar
Miniatura
Nombre:
Carta autorización facultad autoarchivo - Germán Gustavo Munévar.pdf
Tamaño:
282.03 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descripción:
Descargar

Bloque de licencias

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
Miniatura
Nombre:
license.txt
Tamaño:
807 B
Formato:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Descripción:
Descargar

Colecciones

Pregrado Ingeniería Ambiental