More in good condition or less in bad condition? Valence-based framing effects in environmental valuation

This study addresses an important gap in the stated preference literature concerning valence-based framing of discrete choice experiment attributes. Valence-based framing arises when equivalent outcomes are presented in different ways by accentuating either the positive (e.g., more in good condition) or negative information (e.g., less in bad condition). We find that alternative framings produce different willingness-to-pay estimates, with implications for benefit-cost analysis. We recommend neutral attribute descriptions and otherwise testing for the effects of alternative framings to obtain more robust welfare evidence. We also show that the framing used does not affect the choice paradigm adopted by respondents.