Front Matter -- Copyright -- Contents -- Contributing authors -- Acknowledgment -- Introduction -- 1. Response to cost prompts in stated preference valuation of environmental goods -- 2. Fat tails and truncated bids in contingent valuation: an application to an endangered shorebird species -- 3. Inadequate response to frequency of payments in contingent valuation of environmental goods -- 4. An adding-up test on contingent valuations of river and lake quality. 5. Do contingent valuation estimates of willingness to pay for non-use environmental goods pass the scope test with adequacy? A review of the evidence from empirical studies in the literature -- 6. Stated preference methods and their applicability to environmental use and non-use valuations -- 7. Some findings from further exploration of the "composite good" approach to contingent valuation -- 8. Inferences from stated preference surveys when some respondents do not compare costs and benefits -- 9. Assessing the validity of stated preference data using follow-up questions. 10. Hypothetical bias: a new meta-analysis -- 11. Legal obstacles for contingent valuation methods in environmental litigation -- Index.