Exploring divergence between respondent and researcher definitions of the good in contingent valuation studies

In Contingent Valuation studies, researchers often base their definition of the environmental good on scientific/expert consensus. However; respondent s may not hold this same commodity definition prior to the transaction. Thi s raises questions as to the potential for staging a satisfactory transacti on, based on Fischoff and Furby's (1988) criteria. Some unresolved issues r egarding the provision of information to respondents to facilitate such a t ransaction are highlighted. In this paper; we apply content analysis to foc us group discussions and develop a set of rules which take account of the n on-independence of group data to explore whether researcher and respondents ' prior definitions are in any way similar We use the results to guide info rmation provision in a subsequent questionnaire.