Valuing product attributes in vickrey auctions when market substitutes are available

European Review of Agricultural Economics

Volumn 36, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 133-149

  Alfnes, Frode ^a  

^a NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES   (Norway)

Author keywords

Field substitutes; Full bidding approach; Outside options; Vickrey auctions

Indexed keywords

EID: 68649107581     PISSN: 01651587     EISSN: 14643618     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/erae/jbp013     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Alfnes, F. (2007). Willingness to pay versus expected consumption value in Vickrey auctions for new experience goods. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 89: 921-931.
2. Alfnes, F. and Rickertsen, K. (2003). European consumers' willingness to pay for U.S. beef in experimental auction markets. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85: 396-405.
3. Alfnes, F. and Rickertsen, K. (2007). Extrapolating experimental-auction results using a stated choice experiment. European Review of Agricultural Economics 34: 345-363.
4. Alfnes, F., Rickertsen, K. and Ueland, Ø. (2008). Consumer attitudes toward low-stake risk in food markets. Applied Economics 40: 3039-3049.
5. Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G. and Prelec, D. (2003). 'Coherent arbitrariness': stable demand curves without stable preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics 118: 73-105.
6. Becker, G. M., DeGroot, M. H. and Marschak, J. (1964). Measuring utility by a single-response sequential method. Behavioral Science 9: 226-232.
7. Buhr, B. L., Hayes, D. J., Shogren, J. F. and Kliebenstein, J. B. (1993). Valuing ambiguity: the case of genetically engineered growth hormones. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 18: 175-184.
8. Cherry, T. L., Frykblom, P., Shogren, J. F., List, J. A. and Sullivan, M. B. (2004). Laboratory testbeds and non-market valuation: the case of bidding behavior in a second-price auction with an outside option. Environmental & Resource Economics 29: 285-294.
9. Corrigan, J. R. and Rousu, M. C. (2006). The effect of initial endowments in experimental auctions. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88: 448-457.
10. Fox, J. A., Hayes, D. J., Kliebenstein, J. B. and Shogren, J. F. (1994). Consumer acceptability of milk from cows treated with bovine somatotropin. Journal of Dairy Science 77: 703-707.
11. Harrison, G. W., Harstad, R. M. and Rutström, E. E. (2004). Experimental methods and elicitation of value. Experimental Economics 7: 123-140.
12. Hayes, D. J., Shogren, J. F., Shin, S. Y. and Kliebenstein, J. B. (1995). Valuing food safety in experimental auction markets. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 77: 40-53.
13. Hoffman, E., Menkhaus, D., Chakravarit, D., Field, R. and Whipple, G. (1993). Using laboratory experimental auctions in marketing research: a case study of new packaging for fresh beef. Marketing Science 12: 318-338.
14. Kagel, J. H. and Levin, D. (1993). Independent private value auctions: bidder behavior in first-, second-, and third-price auctions with varying numbers of bidders. Economic Journal 103: 868-879.
15. Krishna, V. (2002). Auction Theory. London: Academic Press.
16. Lancaster, K. J. (1966). A new approach to consumer theory. The Journal of Political Economy 74: 132-157.
17. List, J. A. (2001). Do explicit warnings eliminate the hypothetical bias in elicitation procedures? Evidence from field auctions for sportscards. American Economic Review 91: 1498-1507.
18. Lusk, J. L. and Shogren, J. F. (2007). Experimental Auctions: Methods and Applications in Economic and Marketing Research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19. Lusk, J. L., Feldkamp, T. and Schroeder, T. C. (2004a). Experimental auction procedure: impact on valuation of quality differentiated goods. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86: 389-405.
20. Lusk, J. L., House, L. O., Valli, C., Jaeger, S. R., Moore, M., Morrow, B. and Traill, W. B. (2004b). Effect of information about benefits of biotechnology on consumer acceptance of genetically modified food: evidence from experimental auctions in United States, England, and France. European Review of Agricultural Economics 31: 179-204.
21. Melton, B. E., Huffman, W. E., Shogren, J. F. and Fox, J. A. (1996). Consumer preferences for fresh food items with multiple quality attributes: evidence from an experimental auction of pork chops. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 78: 916-923.
22. Milgrom, P. and Weber, R. (2000). A theory of auction and competitive bidding II. In P. Klemperer (ed.) The Economic Theory of Auctions. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
23. Monderer, D. and Tennenholtz, M. (2000). K-price auctions. Games and Economics Behavior 31: 220-244.
24. Noussair, C., Robin, W. and Ruffieux, B. (2004). Do consumers really refuse to buy genetically modified food? Economic Journal 114: 102-120.
25. Nunes, J. and Boatwright, P. (2004). Incidental prices and their effect on willingness to pay. Journal of Marketing Research 16: 457-466.
26. Plott, C. R. and Zeiler, K. (2007). Exchange asymmetries incorrectly interpreted as evidence of endowment effect theory and prospect theory? American Economic Review 97: 1449-1466.
27. Roosen, J., Fox, J. A., Hennessy, D. A. and Schreiber, A. (1998). Consumers' valuation of insecticide use restrictions: an application to apples. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 23: 367-384.
28. Rousu, M., Huffman, W. E., Shogren, J. F. and Tegene, A. (2004). Are United States consumers tolerant of genetically modified foods? Review of Agricultural Economics 26: 19-31.
29. Rozan, A., Stenger, A. and Willinger, M. (2004). Willingness-to-pay for food safety: an experimental investigation of quality certification on bidding behavior. European Review of Agricultural Economics 31: 409-425.
30. Shogren, J. F. (2006). Valuation in the lab. Environmental and Resource Economics 34: 163-172.
31. Shogren, J. F., Fox, J. A., Hayes, D. J. and Kliebenstein, J. B. (1994). Bid sensitivity and the structure of the Vickrey auction. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76: 1089-1095.
32. Umberger, W. J. and Feuz, D. M. (2004). The usefulness of experimental auctions in determining consumers' willingness-to-pay for quality-differentiated products. Review of Agricultural Economics 26: 170-185.
33. Vickrey, W. (1961). Counterspeculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders. Journal of Finance 16: 8-37.
34. Weber, R. (1983). Multiple object auctions. In R. Engelbrecht-Wiggans, M. Shubik and R. Stark (eds), Auctions, Bidding and Contracting: Uses and Theory. New York: New York University Press.
35. Yue, C., Alfnes, F. and Jensen, H. H. (2009). Discounting spotted apples: investigating consumers' willingness to accept cosmetic damage in an organic product. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 41: 29-46.