Using choice experiments to value non-market goods and services: Evidence from field experiments

Advances in Economic Analysis and Policy

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 23-61

  List, John A ^a   Sinha, Paramita ^b   Taylor, Michael H ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Field experiments; Valuing nonmarketed goods

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645349070     PISSN: 15380637     EISSN: 15380637     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2202/1538-0637.1132     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Aadland, D., and A. J. Caplan, "Willingness to Pay for Curbside Recycling with Detection and Mitigation of Hypothetical Bias," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2003, 85(2): 492-502.
2. Adamowicz, Wiktor., Jordan Louviere, and Michael Williams, "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Measures for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1994, 26(3): 271-292.
3. Adamowicz, Wiktor., Peter Boxall, Michael Williams, and Jordan Louviere, "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1998, 80(1): 64-75.
4. Arrow, Kenneth, Robert Solow, Paul R. Portney, Edward Leamer, Roy Radner, and H. Schuman, "Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation," Federal Register, 1993, 58(10): 4601-4614.
5. Bohm, P. "Estimating Demand for Public Goods: An Experiment," European Economic Review, 1972, 3(2): 111-130.
6. Butler, J. S., and Robert Moffitt, "A Computationally Efficient Quadrature Procedure for the One Factor Multinomial Probit Model," 1982, Econometrica, 50(3): 761-764.
7. Carlsson, Fredrik., and Peter Martinsson, "Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?" Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2001, 27(2): 179-192.
8. Carson, Richard T., Theodore Groves, and Mark J. Machina, "Incentive and Informational Properties of Preference Questions," University of California, San Diego, working paper, 2000.
9. Cummings, Ronald., Glenn Harrison, and Elisabet Rutström. "Homegrown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous Choice Approach Incentive Compatible?" American Economic Review, 1995, 85(1): 260-266.
10. Cummings, Ronald., Elliott Steve, Glenn Harrison, and J. Murphy, "Are Hypothetical Referenda Incentive Compatible?" Journal of Political Economy, 1997, 105(3): 609-621.
11. Cummings, Ronald., and Laura Taylor, "Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method," American Economic Review, 1999, 89(3): 649-65.
12. Diamond, Peter., and Jerry Hausman. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?" Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1994, 8(4): 45-64.
13. Foster, V., I. Bateman, and D. Harley, "Real and Hypothetical Willingness To Pay for Environmental Preservation: A Non-Experimental Comparison," Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1997, 48(2): 123-138.
14. Haab, Timothy C., Ju-Chin Huang, and John C. Whitehead, "Are Hypothetical Referenda Incentive Compatible? A Comment," Journal of Political Economy, 1999, 107(1): 186-196.
15. Hanley, Nick., Robert E Wright, and Wictor Adamowicz, "Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment," Environmental and Resource Economics, 1998, 11(3-4): 413-428.
16. Harrison, Glenn W. and List, John A., "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, December 2004, 42(4), pp. 1009-55.
17. Huber, Joel., Dan Ariely, and Greg Fischer, "Expressing Preferences in a Principal-Agent Task: A Comparison of Choice, Rating, and Matching," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2002, 87(1): 66-90.
18. Lancaster, K. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, 1974, 74(1): 132-157.
19. List, John A. "Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auctions for Sportscards," American Economic Review, 2001, 91(5): pp. 1498-1507.
20. List, John A., and Craig Gallet, "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values? Evidence from a Meta-Analysis," Environmental and Resource Economics, 2001, 20(3): 241-254.
21. List, John A., and David Lucking-Reiley, "The Effects of Seed Money and Refunds on Charitable Giving: Experimental Evidence from a University Capital Campaign," Journal of Political Economy (2002), 110(1): 215-233.
22. List, John A., Robert Barrens, Alok Bohara, and Joe Kerkvliet, "Examining the Role of Social Isolation on Stated Preferences," American Economic Review, 2004, 4(3): 741-752.
23. List, John A. and Shogren, Jay. "Calibration of Willingness-to- Accept," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2002,43(2): 219-233.
24. Louviere, J.J., D.A. Hensher, and J.D. Swait, Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
25. Lusk, Jayson L. "Willingness-to-pay for Golden Rice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2003, 85(4): 840-856.
26. McFadden, Daniel. "Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior," in Frontiers in Econometrics, P. Zarembka, ed., New York: Academic Press, 1974.
27. Mixer, Joseph R. Principles of Successful Fundraising: Useful Foundations for Successful Practice, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993.
28. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, "Natural Resource Damage Assessment: Proposed Rules," Federal Register, 4 May, 1994, 59: 23098-23111.
29. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, "Natural resource damage assessments: Final rules," Federal Register, 5 January, 1996, 61:439.
30. Smith, V. Kerry. "Of Birds and Books: More on Hypothetical Referenda -Comment," Journal of Political Economy, 1999, 107(1): 197-200.