What needs to be done in contingent valuation: have Smith and Sach missed the boat?

Rachel M. Baker, Gillian R. Currie, Cam Donaldson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle


It is possible to stretch analogies too far, which is how some readers may interpret this response to Smith and Sach’s latest journey on the good ship
‘willingness-to-pay-database’. They can be dangerous tools to use too, if only because it is difficult to resist the inclination to respond in kind!
In their paper, ‘Contingent valuation: what needs to be done?’, Smith and Sach seek to show that contingent valuation (CV) research in health is like a ship without a sail. The solution they arrive at is to suggest ‘more guidelines needed’, although it is not clear if they mean guidelines for reporting of studies or guidelines for the conduct of studies.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)113-121
Number of pages9
JournalHealth Economics, Policy and Law
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2010



  • contingent valuation
  • health economics

Cite this