December 1984

The Role of Focus Groups in Designing a

Contingent Valuation Survey to Measure

the Benefits of Hazardous Waste

Management Regulations

.

ling a

Prepared for

U.s. Environmental Protection Agency

Economic Analysis Division

Washington, DC 20460

Prepared by

Dr. William H. Desvousges

Research Triangle Institute

Research Triangle Park. NC 27709

Dr. V. Kerry Smith

Centennial Professor of Economics

Vanderbilt University

Nashville. TN 37235

Diane H. Brown

and

D. Kirk Pate

Research Triangle Institute

Research Triangle Park. NC 27709

. 1m Project No. 2505-13

EPA Contract No. 68-01-6595

Subcontract No. 700-C

Work Assignment No. C-Oll

EPA Cooperative Agreement No. CR811075-01
Chapter

Preface

Figures

Tables

1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.1 Background. . . . . . . . . .

1.1.1 A Policymaking Challenge:

Congressional Mandates.

1.1.2 Benefit-Cost Assessment:

to Decisionmaking . . . .

1.1.3 A Central Theme: The Rc

I .2 Objectives. . . . . . . . . . .

1.3 Why Use the Contingent Valuation

1.4 Why Use Focus Groups? . . . .

1.5 Summary.. . . . . . . . . . .

, . 6 Guide to the Report. . . . . . .

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

2 Focus Groups--An

2.1 J ntroduction

2.2 The Advantages of Focus Groups.. . . . .

2.3 The Disadvantages of Focus Groups. . . .

2.4 The Design of Focus Groups. . . . . . . .

2.4.1 Planning With the Client. . . . . .

2.4.2 The Focus Group Moderator. . . . .

2.5 I nsights from Hazardous Waste Focus Group

Experience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.5.1 The Moderator. . . . . . . . . . .

2.5.2 Recruiting. . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.5.3 Organizing the Session. . . . . . .

2.5.4 Recording Equipment: Suggestions.

2.5.6 2.5.5 Setting Length of Session. . . . . . . . .

2.5.7 N umber of People. . . . . . . . . .

2.5.8 Degree of Group Acquaintance. . .

2.5.9 Group Homogeneity. . . . . . . . .

2.5.10 Number of Groups. . . . . . . . .

!.6 Summary Suggestions. . . . . . . . . . .

- - - - . . .

2.5.7 N umber of People. . . . . . . . . . . .

2.5.8 Degree of Group Acquaintance. . . . . .

2.5.9 Group Homogeneity. . . . . . . . . . . .

2.5.10 Number of Groups. . . . . . . . . . . .

2.6 Summary Suggestions. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Use of Focus Groups to Develop a Questionnaire to

Measure the Benefits of Hazardous Waste Management

3.1 Guide to the Chapter. . . . . - -

3

CONTENTS

.E!9!

iii

ix

xi

. . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . .

.

. .

.

. . . . .

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

. . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

1-1

1-1

1-2

. . .

.

. . . . . . . . . .

.

. . . . .

. . . . .

The

. . . . . . .

.

A

. . .

Guide

. . . . . . . . .

1-2

1-3

1-4

1-6

1-8

1-12

1-14

. . . . . . .

Role

. . .

.

.

.

.

. .

of Risk . . . . .

. . . .

Survey

. . . . .

Valuation

.

.

.

.

. . . . . . .

Approach? .

.

.

.

. .

.

.

. . . . . .

.

.

. . .

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

. . . . .

Report. .

Overview

. .

.

. .

.

. . .

.

. .

. . . . . . . . .

2-1

2-1

2-2

2-4

2-5

2-5

2-6

2-9

2-9

2-10

2-13

2-13

2-14

2-16

2-16

2-17

2-17

2-18

2-18

. . . . . . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

. .

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . . .

.

.

.

. . . .

.

.

..

. .

.

. .

. .

.

.

. . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . . . .

.

.

.

. . .

.

.

.

.

.

. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

. . .

.

of

of

of

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . .

. . . . .

.

.

.

. . . . . . .

.

.

. .

.

.

.

. . . .

.

.

.

Homogeneity.

. of Groups. . . .

.

. .

.

. . . . .

.

.

. . . . . . .

.

.

.

. .

. . . . . . . . . . .

3-1

3-1

.

.

. . . .

.

. . . .

Chapter

. . . .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . .

.

. .

. . . . . . . . . .

v
Chapter

3.3

4 Analytical Findings of Focus Groups on Hazardous

Waste Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.1 Overview: Topics for Discussion. . . . . . . . . .

4.2 Guide to the Chapter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.3 Focus Group Profile: Participant Awareness of the

Hazardous Waste Problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.4 Risk Perceptions and Attributes. . . . . . . . . . .

4.4.1 Perceptions of Risk. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.4.2 Occupational Risk. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.4.3 Attributes of Risk. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.5 Perceived Risks of Hazardous Waste Exposure. . . . .

4.5.1 Participants Close to Hazardous Waste Problems.

4.5.2 Participants Not Close to Hazardous Waste

f

'1

I. ~. 6 Environmental Attitudes. . . . . . . . . . . 

.

4.6.1 Perceptions 01 Environmental Issues. .

4.6.2 Responsibility for Environmental Problems

4.6.3 Risks from Environmental Problems. . .

J.7 Understanding of Hazardous Wastes. . . . . . ,

4.7.1 Knowledge of Hazardous Wastes. . . . .

4.7.2 Hazardous Waste Exposure Pathways. . .

4.7.3 The Unknowns of Hazardous Wastes. . .

4.7.4 Hazardous Waste Landfill Siting. . . . .

4.7.5 Responsibility for Hazardous Wastes. . .

I!~

f"

f]

CONTENTS(continued)

f!.a!

3-2

3-4

3-4

3-5

3-6

3-11

3-16

3-22

3-25

3-25

3-30

3-38

3.2 Overview: Findings and I ssues in

Questionnaire Development. . . .

- . .

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.....

.

.

...

.

...

3.3 probability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.3.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.3.2 Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.3.3 Round 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.3.4 Round 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.3.5 Rounds 4 and 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.3.6 Round 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.4 Perception of Exposure Risk. . . . . . . . . .

3.4.2 3.4.1 Circles Risk Ladder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.4.3 Distance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.5 Numbers and Types of Products with Hazardous

3.6 Byproducts Exposure Pathways and How Consumers Pay. . . .

3.7 Information Necessary to Understand the Valuation

- ..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

...

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

.

..

.5

..

......

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

....

.

.

. .

.

.

Risk

..

.

.

...

.

.

3.4

.

.

.

..

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

...

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

3-41

3-43

..

.

.

.

.

.

3-48

3-48

3-52

3-54

3-58

Question

.

.

....

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

..

...

.

.

.

.

3.7.1 Hypothetical Sitl

3.7.2 Dollar Amounts.

3.7.3 Valuation Task.

3.8 Summary. . . . . . .

Situation

..

.

...

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

of Focus Groups on Hazardous

4-1

4-1

4-2

4-3

4-7

4-7

4-10

4-11

4.13

4-14

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

Awareness

.

...

.

..

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

of

. .

the

.

.

.

.

.

.

...

......

.

.

.

..

.

...

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

4-16

4-17

4-17

4-18

4-19

4-20

4-20

4-23

4-24

4-25

4-26

Problems

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

..

.

.

..

.

.

..

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

.....

.

..

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

vi
Chapter

4.8 Understanding of the Payment Vehicle. . . . . . . .

4.8.1 Understanding of Who Pays. . . . . . . . . .

4.8.2 Understanding of How Much Should Be Paid.

4.8.3 Ability of Participants to Think Hypothetically

4.8.4 Significant Factors in the Hypothetical Situation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.8.5 Difficulties of Presenting the Payment Vehicle

Concept. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.9 Perception of Compensation. . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.10 Governmental Effectiveness and Other Key Analytical

Variables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.10.1 Perceptions of Governmental Effectiveness. .

4.10.2 Other Analytical Variables. . . . . . . . . .

5 The Role of Pretesting and

in Developing a Contingent

Questionnaire. . . . . .

5.2 Pretest of Contingent

5.3 Questionnaire Vdeotaped Interviews. . . . . . . . . . .

5.4 Questionnai re Reviews. . . . . . . . . .

5.5 The Questionnaire Development Process:

Reflections and Suggestions for Improvement

Bibliography

CONTENTS(continued)

~

4-30

4-30

4-31

4-31

4-33

4-35

4-35

. .

.

.

.

.

. .

. .

. .

. .

4-38

4-38

4-45

4-47

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Videotaped 'Interviews

Valuation Survey

5-1

5-1

. . . . . . .

. . . .

Survey

. . . . . .

. . . . .

Valuation

. .

.

. . .

. . . . . . . .

5-2

5-7

5-11

5-11

6-1

. . . . . . .

. . . . .

.

.

. . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vii