An experimental analysis of impacts of uncertainty and irreversibility on willingness-to-pay

Applied Economics Letters

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 67-72

  Isik, Murat ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 32844464976     PISSN: 13504851     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/135054850500119203     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bhatia, MR and Fox-Rushby, JA. (2003) Validity of willingness to pay: hypothetical versus actual payment Applied Economics Letters, 10, pp. 737 - 40.
2. Botelho, A and Costa Pinto, L. (2002) Hypothetical, real, and predicted real willingness to pay in open-ended surveys: Experimental results Applied Economics Letters, 9, pp. 993 - 6.
3. Diamond, PA and Hausman, JA. (1994) Contingent valuation: Is some number better than no number? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8, pp. 45 - 64.
4. Dixit, AK and Pindyck, RS.(1994) Investment Under Uncertainty. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
5. Donaldson, C and Thomas, R and Torgerson, DJ. (1997) Validity of open-ended and payment scale approaches to eliciting willingness to pay Applied Economics, 29, pp. 79 - 85.
6. Frykblom, P. (2000) Willingness to pay and the choice of question format: Experimental results Applied Economics Letters, 7, pp. 665 - 7.
7. Hanemann, WM. (1991) Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: How much can they differ? American Economic Review, 81, pp. 635 - 47.
8. Hanley, N and Shogren, JF and White, B.(1997) Environmental Economics in Theory and Practice. Hampshire NJ: MacMillan Press.
9. Horowitz, JK and McConnell, KE. (2002) A review of WTA/WTP studies Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 44, pp. 426 - 47.
10. Johannesson, M and Blomquist, GC and Blumenschein, K and Liljas, B and O'Conner, RM. (1999) Calibrating hypothetical willingness to pay responses Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 8, pp. 21 - 3.
11. Johannesson, M and Liljas, B and Johansson, PO. (1998) An experimental comparison of dichotomous choice contingent valuation questions and real purchase decisions Applied Economics, 30, pp. 643 - 7.
12. Johannesson, M and Liljas, B and O'Conor, RM. (1997) Hypothetical versus real willingness to pay: Some experimental results Applied Economics Letters, 4, pp. 149 - 51.
13. Kahneman, D and Knetsch, JL and Thaler, RH. (1990) Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem Journal of Political Economy, 98, pp. 1325 - 48.
14. Loomis, J and Ekstrand, E. (1998) Alternative approaches for incorporating respondent uncertainty when estimating willingness-to-pay: the case of Mexican spotted owl Ecological Economics, 27, pp. 29 - 41.
15. Loureiro, ML and Umberger, WJ and Hine, S. (2003) Testing the initial endowment effect in experimental auctions Applied Economics Letters, 10, pp. 271 - 5.
16. Morrison, GC. (1997) Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: Some evidence of an endowment effect Applied Economics, 29, pp. 411 - 7.
17. National Parks Conservation Association.(2004) American Crocodile (Crocodylus acutus). In., Accessed on 10 November
18. Paradiso, M and Trisorio, A. (2001) The effect of knowledge on the disparity between hypothetical and real willingness to pay Applied Economics, 33, pp. 1359 - 64.
19. Thaler, RH. (1980) Toward a positive theory of consumer choice Journal of Economics Behavior and Organization, 1, pp. 39 - 60.
20. Kooten, GC and Krcmar, E and Bulte, EH. (2001) Preference uncertainty in non-market valuation: A fuzzy approach American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83, pp. 487 - 810.