Homo Economicus and Homo Politicus: Interpretation and aggregation of environmental values

Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization

Volumn 42, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 305-322

  Nyborg, Karine ^a  

^a STATISTICS NORWAY   (Norway)

Author keywords

D11; D61; Environmental valuation; H41; Multiple preference orderings; Q21; Social welfare judgments

Indexed keywords

EID: 0002797884     PISSN: 01672681     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-2681(00)00091-3     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Ajzen I., Brown T.C., Rosenthal L.H. Information bias in contingent valuation studies: effects of personal relevance, quality of information, and motivational orientation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 30:1996;43-57.
2. Andreoni J. Impure altruism and donations to public goods: a theory of warm-glow giving. The Economic Journal. 100:1990;464-477.
3. Arrow, K.J., 1951. Social choice and individual values, Cowles Commission Monograph no.12, Wiley, New York.
4. Arrow K., Solow R., Leamer E., Portney P., Radner R., Schuman H. Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Federal Register. 58(10):1993;4602-4614.
5. Blamey R., Common M., Quiggin J. Respondents to contingent valuation surveys: consumers or citizens? Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics. 39:1995;263-288.
6. Boyce R.R., Brown T.C., McClelland G.H., Peterson G.L., Schultze W.D. An experimental examination of intrinsic values as a source of the WTA-WTP disparity. American Economic Review. 82:1992;1366-1373.
7. Brekke K.A., Lurås H., Nyborg K. Allowing disagreement in evaluations of social welfare. Journal of Economics (Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie). 63:1996;303-324.
8. Clark, J., Burgess, J., 1996. Asking questions about answering questions: a case study of public understanding of a contingent valuation survey. Unpublished draft version, Department of Geography, University College, London.
9. Desvouges, W.H., Johnson, F.R., Dunford, R.W., Hudson, S.P., Wilson, K.N., 1993. Measuring natural resource damages with contingent valuation: tests of validity and reliability, In: Hausman, J.A. (Ed.), Contingent valuation. A Critical Assessment, North-Holland, Amsterdam/New York, pp. 91-164.
10. Freeman, A.M., 1993. The measurement of environmental and resource values. Theory and methods, Resources for the Future, Washington DC.
11. Hanemann W.M. Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: how much can they differ? American Economic Review. 81:1991;635-647.
12. Hanemann W.M. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 8:1994;19-44.
13. Harsanyi J.C. Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility. Journal of Political Economy. 63:1955;309-321.
14. Hausman, D.M., McPherson, M.S., 1996. Economic Analysis and Moral Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
15. Johansson, P.-O., 1993. Cost-benefit Analysis of Environmental Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
16. Kahneman D., Knetsch J.L. Valuing public goods: the purchase of moral satisfaction. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 22:1992;57-70.
17. Knetsch J.L. Environmental policy implications of disparities between willingness to pay and compensation demanded measures of values. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 18:1990;227-237.
18. Margolis, H. 1982. Selfishness, altruism, and rationality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
19. Milgrom, P., 1993. Is sympathy an economic value? Philosophy, economics, and the contingent valuation method, In: Hausman, J.A. (Ed.), Contingent Valuation. A Critical Assessment, North-Holland, Amsterdam/New York.
20. Mitchell, R.C., Carson, R.T., 1989. Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method, Resources for the Future, Washington DC.
21. Mueller, D., 1987. The voting paradox. In: Rowley, C.K. (Ed.), Democracy and public choice, Essays in Honor of Gordon Tullock, Basil Blackwell, Oxford/New York, PP. 77-99.
22. Opaluch, J.J., Grigalunas, T.A., 1991. Non-use values under ambivalence: theory and measurement of ill-defined preference orderings. Staff Paper Series, Department of Resource Economics, University of Rhode Island, Kingston.
23. Peterson, G.L., Brown, T.C., McCollum, D.W., Bell, P.A., Birjulin, A.A., Clarke, A., 1995. Moral responsibility effects in valuations of WTA for public and private goods by the method of paired comparison. Paper presented at the Sixth Annual Conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, Ume, Sweden.
24. Sagoff, M., 1988. The Economy of the Earth. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
25. Schkade, D.A., Payne, J.W., 1993. Where do the numbers come from? How people respond to contingent valuation questions. In: Hausman, J.A. (Ed.), Contingent Valuation. A Critical Assessment, North-Holland, Amsterdam/New York.
26. Sen A.K. Rational fools: a critique of the behavioural foundations of economic theory. Philosophy and Public Affairs. 6:1977;317-344.
27. Stevens T.H., Echeverria J., Glass R.J., Hager T., More T.A. Measuring the existence value of wildlife: what do CVM estimates really show? Land Economics. 67:1991;390-400.
28. Vadnjal D., O'Connor M. What is the value of Rangitoto Island? Environmental Values. 3:1994;369-380.
29. Vatn A., Bromley D.W. Choices without prices without apologies. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 26:1994;129-148.
30. Winston G.C. Addiction and backsliding: a theory of compulsive consumption. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 1:1980;295-324.