Estimating discount rates for environmental quality from utility-based choice experiments

Journal of Risk and Uncertainty

Volumn 37, Issue 2-3, 2008, Pages 199-220

  Viscusi, W Kip ^a   Huber, Joel ^b   Bell, Jason ^b  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Environment; Hyperbolic discounting; Rate of time preference; Stated preferences; Water

Indexed keywords

EID: 55949095125     PISSN: 08955646     EISSN: 15730476     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11166-008-9045-x     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. K. Arrow R. Solow P. R. Portney E. E. Leamer R. Radner H. Schuman 1993 Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation Federal Register 58 4601 4614
2. R. C. Bishop M. P. Welsh 1992 Existence values in benefit-cost analysis and damage assessment Land Economics 68 4 405 417
3. Carson, R. T., Flores, N. E., & Mitchell, R. C. (1999). The theory and measurement of passive-use value. In I. J. Bateman, & K. G. Willis (Eds.), Valuing environmental preferences. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Cropper, M. L., & Laibson, D. (1999). The implications of hyperbolic discounting for project evaluation. In P. Portney, & J. P. Weyant (Eds.), Discounting and intergenerational equity. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
5. S. DellaVigna U. Malmendier 2006 Paying not to go to the gym American Economic Review 96 3 694 719
6. S. Frederick G. Loewenstein T. O'Donoghue 2002 Time discounting and time preference: A critical review Journal of Economic Literature xl 351 401
7. T. A. Heberlein M. A. Wilson R. C. Bishop N. C. Schaeffer 2005 Rethinking the scope test as a criterion for validity in contingent valuation Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 50 1 22
8. J. Horowitz R. T. Carson 1990 Discounting statistical lives Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 3 403 413
9. J. Huber K. E. Train 2001 On the similarity of classical and bayesian estimates of individual mean partworths Marketing Letters 12 259 269
10. Huber, J., Viscusi, W. K., & Bell, J. (2008). Reference dependence in iterative choices. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, in press.
11. J. Huber K. Zwerina 1996 The importance of utility balance in efficient choice designs Journal of Marketing Research 33 307 317
12. D. Laibson 1997 Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting Quarterly Journal of Economics 112 2 443 477
13. G. Loewenstein 2000 Emotions in economic theory and economic behavior American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 90 2 426 432
14. W. A. Magat W. K. Viscusi J. Huber 2000 An iterative choice approach to valuing clean lakes, rivers, and streams Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 21 1 7 43
15. McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional Logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics. New York: Academic.
16. Rust, J. (1994). Structural estimation of Markov decision processes. In R. F. Engle, & D. L. McFadden (Eds.), Handbook of econometrics volume IV. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
17. V. K. Smith 1987 Non-use values in benefit-cost analysis Southern Economic Journal 54 19 26
18. V. K. Smith L. L. Osborne 1996 Do contingent valuation estimates pass a 'scope' test? A meta-analysis Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 31 3 287 301
19. R. Strotz 1956 Myopia and inconsistency in dynamic utility maximization Review of Economic Studies 23 165 180
20. Train, K. E. (2003). Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (1994). National Water Quality Inventory, 1992 Report to Congress, EPA 841-R-94-001.
22. Viscusi, W. K., Huber, J., & Bell, J. (2008). The economic value of water quality. Environmental and Resource Economics. doi: 10.1007/s10640-007- 9186-4.