Biased valuations, damage assessments, and policy choices: The choice of measure matters

Ecological Economics

Volumn 63, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 684-689

  Knetsch, Jack L ^a  

^a SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Choice of measure; Discount rates; Endowment effect

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; CLEANUP; DAMAGE; ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; HEALTH RISK; MEASUREMENT METHOD; VALUATION;

EID: 34447100272     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.02.012     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Alberini A., and Krupnick A. Cost-of-illness and willingness-to-pay estimates of the benefits of improved air quality: evidence from Taiwan. Land Economics 76 (2000) 37-53
2. Bromley D. Property rights and natural resource damage assessments. Ecological Economics 14 (1995) 129-135
3. Brown T., and Gregory R. Why the WTA-WTP disparity matters. Ecological Economics 28 (1999) 323-335
4. Camerer C. Prospect theory in the wild. In: Kahneman D., and Tversky A. (Eds). Choices, Values, and Frames (2000), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
5. Chin, A., Knetsch, J., in process. Values depend on the measures: are many transport projects valuations seriously biased?
6. Diamond P., Hausman J., Leonard G., and Denning M. Does contingent valuation measure preferences? Experimental evidence. In: Hausman (Ed). Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment (1993), Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam
7. Donkers, B., Gregory, R., Knetsch, J., in process. Discounting future gains and future losses: predictable differences and appropriate measures.
8. Ellickson R. Alternatives to zoning: covenants, nuisance rules, and fines as land use controls. University of Chicago Law Review 40 (1973) 581-781
9. Fischel W. Regulatory Takings: Law, Economics, and Politics (1995), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
10. Hammack J., and Brown G. Waterfowl and Wetlands: Toward Bioeconomic Analysis (1974), Resources For the Future, Washington, D.C.
11. Hanemann M. Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: how much can they differ?. The American Economic Review 81 (1991) 635-647
12. Henderson A. Consumer's surplus and the compensation variation. Review of Economic Studies 8 (1941) 117
13. Horowitz J., and McConnell K. A review of WTA/WTP studies. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 44 (2002) 426-447
14. Kachelmeier S., and Shehata M. Examining risk preferences under high monetary incentives: experimental evidence from the People's Republic of China. The American Economic Review 82 (1992) 1120-1140
15. Kahneman D., and Miller D. Norm theory: comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review 93 (1986) 136-153
16. Kahneman D., and Tversky A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica 47 (1979) 263-291
17. Kahneman D., Knetsch J., and Thaler R. Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem. Journal of Political Economy 98 (1990) 1325-1348
18. Kahneman D., Knetsch J., and Thaler R. The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5 (1991) 193-206
19. Knetsch J. Environmental valuations and standard theory: behavioral findings, context dependence, and implications. In: Tietenberg T., and Folmer H. (Eds). The International Yearbook of Environmental and Resource Economics 2000/2001 (2000), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK 267-299
20. Knetsch J.L. The appropriate choice of valuation measure in usual cases of losses valued more than gains. Singapore Economic Review 50 (2005) 393-406
21. Knetsch J., Tang F., and Thaler R. The endowment effect and repeated market trials: is the Vickrey auction demand revealing?. Experimental Economics 4 (2001) 257-269
22. List J. Does market experience eliminate market anomalies?. Quarterly Journal of Economics 118 (2003) 47-71
23. Loewenstein G. Frames of mind in intertemporal choice. Management Science 34 (1988) 200-214
24. Odean T. Are investors reluctant to realize their losses?. The Journal of Finance 53 (1998) 1775-1798
25. Plott C., and Zeiler K. The willingness to pay-willingness to accept gap, the 'endowment effect,' subject misconceptions, and experimental procedures for eliciting valuations. The American Economic Review 95 (2005) 530-545
26. Putler D. Incorporating reference price effects into a theory of consumer choice. Marketing Science 11 (1992) 287-309
27. Rabin M. Psychology and economics. Journal of Economic Literature 36 (1998) 11-46
28. Samuelson W., and Zeckhauser R. Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1 (1988) 7-59
29. Thaler R., and Benartzi S. Save more tomorrow: using behavioral economics to increase employee saving. Journal of Political Economy 112 (2004) S164-S182
30. Tietenberg T. Envionmental and Natural Resource Economics. 4th ed. (1996), Harper-Collins, New York
31. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses (2000), Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
32. Varian H. Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach (1990), W.W. Norton & Company, New York
33. Zerbe R. Economic Efficiency in Law and Economics (2001), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK