Distributional preferences and the incidence of costs and benefits in climate change policy

Environmental and Resource Economics

Volumn 46, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 429-458

  Cai, Beilei ^a   Cameron, Trudy Ann ^a   Gerdes, Geoffrey R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

^b FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD   (United States)

Author keywords

Climate change; Construct validity; Distributional preferences; Equity; Payment vehicle; Regressivity; Stated preference

Indexed keywords

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COSTS; CRASHWORTHINESS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; SURVEYS;

CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; DISTRIBUTIONAL PREFERENCES; EQUITY; REGRESSIVITY; STATED PREFERENCES;

CLIMATE CHANGE;

CLIMATE CHANGE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; PERCEPTION; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 77954621374     PISSN: 09246460     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10640-010-9348-7     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Anthoff D, Hepburn C, Tol RSJ (2009) Equity weighting and the marginal damage costs of climate change. Ecol Econ 68(3): 836-849.
2. Arrow K, Solow R, Portney PR, Leamer EE, Radner R, Schuman H (1993) Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Fed Regist 58(10): 4601-4614.
3. Atkinson G, Machado F, Mourato S (2000) Balancing competing principles of environmental equity. Enivron Plan A 32(10): 1791-1806.
4. Azar C, Sterner T (1996) Discounting and distributional considerations in the context of global warming. Ecol Econ 19(2): 169-184.
5. Bergstrom JC, Boyle KJ, Yabe M (2004) Trading taxes vs. paying taxes to value and finance public environmental goods. Environ Resour Econ 28(4): 533-549.
6. Berrens RP, Bohara AK, Jenkins-Smith H, Silva CL, Ganderton P, Brookshire D (1998) A joint investigation of public support and public values: the case of instream flows in New Mexico. Ecol Econ 27(2): 189-203.
7. Berrens RP, Bohara AK, Jenkins-Smith H, Silva C, Weimer DL (2003) The advent of Internet surveys for political research: a comparison of telephone and Internet samples. Polit Anal 11(1): 1-22.
8. Berrens RP, Bohara AK, Jenkins-Smith HC, Silva CL, Weimer DL (2004) Information and effort in contingent valuation surveys: application to global climate change using national internet samples. J Environ Econ Manag 47(2): 331-363.
9. Bosello F, Roson R, Tol RSJ (2006) Economy-wide estimates of the implications of climate change: human health. Ecol Econ 58(3): 579-591.
10. Burghart DR, Cameron TA, Gerdes GR (2007) Valuing publicly sponsored research projects: risks, scenario adjustments, and inattention. J Risk Uncertain 35(1): 77-105.
11. Cameron TA (2005a) Individual option prices for climate change mitigation. J Public Econ 89(2-3): 283-301.
12. Cameron TA (2005b) Updating subjective risks in the presence of conflicting information: an application to climate change. J Risk Uncertain 30(1): 63-97.
13. Cameron TA, Gerdes GR (2005) Individual subjective discounting: form, context, format, and noise. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Economics, University of Oregon, 52 pp.
14. Cameron TA, Gerdes GR (2006) Discounting versus risk aversion: their effects on individual demands for climate change mitigation. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Economics, University of Oregon, 56 pp.
15. Champ PA, Flores NE, Brown TC, Chivers J (2002) Contingent valuation and incentives. Land Econ 78(4): 591-604.
16. de Blaeij A, Florax R, Rietveld P, Verhoef E (2003) The value of statistical life in road safety: a meta-analysis. Accid Anal Prev 35(6): 973-986.
17. DeShazo JR, Fermo G (2002) Designing choice sets for stated preference methods: the effects of complexity on choice consistency. J Environ Econ Manag 44(1): 123-143.
18. Diamond PA, Hausman JA (1994) Contingent valuation-is some number better than no number? J Econ Persp 8(4): 45-64.
19. Dietz S, Stern N (2008) Symposium: the economics of climate change: the Stern Review and its critics: why economic analysis supports strong action on climate change: a response to the Stern Review's critics. Rev Environ Econ Pol 2(1): 94-113.
20. Florax R, Travisi CM, Nijkamp P (2005) A meta-analysis of the willingness to pay for reductions in pesticide risk exposure. Eur Rev Agr Econ 32(4): 441-467.
21. Flores NE (2002) Non-paternalistic altruism and welfare economics. J Public Econ 83(2): 293-305.
22. Flores NE, Strong A (2007) Cost credibility and the stated preference analysis of public goods. Resour Energy Econ 29(3): 195-205.
23. Hanley N, Grande J, Álvarez-Farizo B, Salt C, Wilson M (2001) Risk perceptions, risk-reducing behaviour and willingness to pay: radioactive contamination in food following a nuclear accident. Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of Glasgow.
24. Hensher DA (2006) Revealing differences in willingness to pay due to the dimensionality of stated choice designs: an initial assessment. Environ Resour Econ 34(1): 7-44.
25. Johnson LT (2006) Distributional preferences in contingent valuation surveys. Ecol Econ 56(4): 475-487.
26. Jorgensen BS, Syme GJ (2000) Protest responses and willingness to pay: attitude toward paying for stormwater pollution abatement. Ecol Econ 33(2): 251-265.
27. Kelly DL, Kolstad CD, Mitchell GT (2005) Adjustment costs from environmental change. J Environ Econ Manag 50(3): 468-495.
28. Kinnell J, Lazo JK, Epp DJ, Fisher A, Shortle JS (2002) Perceptions and values for preventing ecosystem change: Pennsylvania duck hunters and the Prairie Pothole Region. Land Econ 78(2): 228-244.
29. Krutilla K (2005) Using the Kaldor-Hicks tableau format for cost-benefit analysis and policy evaluation. J Policy Anal Manag 24(4): 864-875.
30. Kurukulasuriya P, Mendelsohn R, Hassan R, Benhin J, Deressa T, Diop M, Eid HM, Fosu KY, Gbetibouo G, Jain S, Mahamadou A, Mano R, Kabubo-Mariara J, El-Marsafawy S, Molua E, Ouda S, Ouedraogo M, Sene I, Maddison D, Seo SN, Dinar A (2006) Will African agriculture survive climate change? World Bank Econ Rev 20(3): 367-388.
31. Lange A (2006) The impact of equity-preferences on the stability of international environmental agreements. Environ Resour Econ 34(2): 247-267.
32. Lange A, Vogt C, Ziegler A (2007) On the importance of equity in international climate policy: an empirical analysis. Energy Econ 29(3): 545-562.
33. Laughland AS, Musser WN, Shortle JS, Musser LM (1996) Construct validity of averting cost measures of environmental benefits. Land Econ 72(1): 100-112.
34. Lee JJ, Cameron TA (2008) Popular support for climate change mitigation: evidence from a general population mail survey. Environ Resour Econ 41(2): 223-248.
35. Li H, Berrens RP, Bohara AK, Jenkins-Smith HC, Silva CL, Weimer DL (2004) Would developing country commitments affect us households' support for a modified Kyoto Protocol? Ecol Econ 48: 329-343.
36. Mendelsohn R (2008) Symposium: the economics of climate change: the Stern Review and its critics: is the Stern Review an economic analysis? Rev Environ Econ Policy 2(1): 45-60.
37. Mendelsohn R, Dinar A, Williams L (2006) The distributional impact of climate change on rich and poor countries. Environ Dev Econ 11: 159-178.
38. Morrison MD, Blamey RK, Bennett JW (2000) Minimising payment vehicle bias in contingent valuation studies. Environ Resour Econ 16(4): 407-422.
39. Nordhaus WD (2007) A review of the Stern Review on the economics of climate change. J Econ Lit 45(3): 686-702.
40. Parks BC, Roberts JT (2006) Globalization, vulnerability to climate change, and perceived injustice. Soc Nat Resour 19(4): 337-355.
41. Raymond L (2006) Cutting the "Gordian knot" in climate change policy. Energy Pol 34(6): 655-658.
42. Reibstein R (2005) Ethics, equity and international negotiations on climate change. Ecol Econ 52(4): 545-546.
43. Rollins K (1997) Wilderness canoeing in Ontario: using cumulative results to update dichotomous choice contingent valuation offer amounts. Can J Agric Econ 45(1): 1-16.
44. Schade C, Kunreuther H, Kaas KP (2002) Low-probability insurance decisions: the role of concern. Wharton Risk Center Working Paper Nr. 02-10-HK, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.
45. Schlapfer F (2006) Survey protocol and income effects in the contingent valuation of public goods: a meta-analysis. Ecol Econ 57(3): 415-429.
46. Stephan G, Muller-Furstenberger G (2004) Does distribution matter? Efficiency, equity and flexibility in greenhouse gas abatement. Environ Resour Econ 27(1): 87-107.
47. Stern N (2006) The economics of climate change: the Stern Review. Cambridge University Press, New York.
48. Sterner T, Persson UM (2008) Symposium: the economics of climate change: The Stern Review and its critics: an even Sterner Review: introducing relative prices into the discounting debate. Rev Environ Econ Policy 2(1): 61-76.
49. Stevens TH, DeCoteau NE, Willis CE (1997) Sensitivity of contingent valuation to alternative payment schedules. Land Econ 73(1): 140-148.
50. Thomas DSG, Twyman C (2005) Equity and justice in climate change adaptation amongst natural-resource-dependent societies. Glob Environ Change Human Pol Dimen 15(2): 115-124.
51. Turner RK (2007) Limits to CBA in UK and European environmental policy: retrospects and future prospects. Environ Resour Econ 37(1): 253-269.
52. Viscusi WK, Zeckhauser RJ (2006) The perception and valuation of the risks of climate change: a rational and behavioral blend. Clim Change 77: 151-177.
53. Weitzman ML (2007) A review of the Stern Review on the economics of climate change. J Econ Lit 45(3): 703-724.
54. Weyant JP (2008) Symposium: the economics of climate change: the Stern Review and its critics: a critique of the Stern Review's mitigation cost analyses and integrated assessment. Rev Environ Econ Pol 2(1): 77-93.
55. Whitehead JC, Blomquist GC, Ready RC, Huang JC (1998) Construct validity of dichotomous and polychotomous choice contingent valuation questions. Environ Resour Econ 11(1): 107-116.