Abstract
The aim of this paper is to report new evidence relating to residents' valuations of aircraft noise in three countries with an emphasis on a comparison of the valuations obtained using two contrasting approaches. One might be regarded as a standard stated choice approach offering pairwise comparisons of two alternatives characterised by a limited number of attributes. The other choice format adopted is innovative in drawing inspiration from the priority evaluator approach to embed aircraft movements alongside a wide range of other local factors that impact on residents' quality of life. The paper addresses the differences in the results of the two approaches and explores the possible explanations for these variations. Although not conclusive, there is a suspicion that strategic bias may have influenced the results and we urge further research regarding incentives to such bias. © 2007 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.