This project studies and compares three alternative methods of measuring willingness-to-accept to find acceptable solutions to the problem of siting hazardous waste facilities. They are the contingency valuation survey, laboratory experimental method, and the structured focus group or public value forum. Each method has advantages and disadvantages. The focus of the investigation will be to compare the effectiveness of these three alternatives in obtaining willingness-to-accept measures, so that an acceptable solution to the hazardous waste facility siting problem may become evident. Information from this investigation will be useful in wording questions used in community referenda that determine the acceptance or rejection of a hazardous waste facility. Such referenda can include a compensation package which is used to make more attractive the siting of an hazardous waste facility in a community. Additionally, such information will be useful in investigating the ethical and equity implications of certain socioeconomic factors such as education and income in willingness- to-accept responses.
