Experimenting with multi-attribute utility survey methods in a multi-dimensional valuation problem

The use of willingness-to-pay (WTP) survey techniques based on multi-attrib ute utility (MAU) approaches has been recommended by some authors as a way to deal simultaneously with two difficulties that increasingly plague envir onmental valuation. The first of these is that, as valuation exercises come to involve less familiar and more subtle environmental effects. such as ec osystem management, lay respondents are less likely to have any idea, in ad vance, of the value they would attach to a described result. The second is that valuation questions may increasingly be about multi-dimensional effect s (e.g. changes in ecosystem function) as opposed for example to changes in visibility from a given point. MAU has been asserted to allow the asking o f simpler questions, even in the context of difficult subjects. And it is, as the name suggests, inherently multi-dimensional. This paper asks whether MAU techniques can be shown to 'make a difference' in the context of quest ions about preferences over, and valuation of differences between, alternat ive descriptions of a forest ecosystem. Making a difference is defined in t erms of internal consistency of answers to preference and WTP questions inv olving three 5-attribute forest descriptions. The method involves first ask ing MAU-structured questions attribute-by-attribute. The responses to these questions allow researchers to infer each respondent's preferences and WTP . Second, the same respondents are asked directly about their preferences a nd WTPs. The answer to the making-a-difference question, based largely on c omparing the inferred and slated results is not straightforward. Overall, t he inferred results are good 'predictors' of what is slated. But the agreem ent is by no means perfect. And the individual differences are not explaina ble by the socio-economic characteristics of the individuals. Since the tec hnique involves creating a long, somewhat tedious, and even apparently conf using series of tasks (though each task may itself be simple), it is by no means clear that the prescription,'use MAU techniques', holds the same leve l of practical as of theoretical promise. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. Al l rights reserved.