This paper stems from a research project concerned with estimating the value that a community places on its local public transport services over and above the benefits that are directly attributable to use. During the design of surveys for this project a number of issues arose which have wider implications for attitudinal research. Among the concepts central to the work are those of option values, indirect benefits and altruistic values. Such concepts have been incorporated, with apparent success in studies of environmental assets such as national parks, and according to initial results, were apparently understood by most of our respondents in the context of local public transport services. Some success has been gained in obtaining valuations via stated preference exercises but several issues still cause concern: 1) Do the respondents really understand the concepts? 2) What is the effect of adopting different payment mechanisms by which respondents can imagine 'paying' for the various levels of service on offer? 3) How does one deal with a very serious potential response bias? 4) From whom should valuations be sought - individuals? households? interest groups? and how should responses be aggregated given the presence of interpersonal benefits? 5) How are the attitudes of dependent children obtained (and incorporated) - given that they rely heavily on public transport but do not have truly independent incomes? This paper explores these issues and indicates how they have been approached in the surveys.
Abstract