Uncertainty and measurement error in welfare models for risk changes

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

Volumn 61, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 341-354

  Riddel, Mary ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision weighted utility; Nuclear waste transport; Risk and uncertainty; Subjective expected utility

Indexed keywords

DATA SETS; DETERMINISTIC COMPONENT; ENDOGENEITY; EXTERNAL COSTS; MORTALITY RISK; NUCLEAR-WASTE TRANSPORT; RISK AND UNCERTAINTY; SUBJECTIVE EXPECTED UTILITY; TRANSPORT RISKS; UTILITY MODEL; WASTE TRANSPORT; WEIGHTED UTILITY; WELFARE LOSS;

COST ACCOUNTING; NUCLEAR REACTOR ACCIDENTS; POTENTIAL FLOW; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

RISK PERCEPTION;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DATA SET; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL RISK; ERROR ANALYSIS; MORTALITY RISK; NUMERICAL MODEL; RADIOACTIVE WASTE; RISK ASSESSMENT; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WASTE TRANSPORT; WELFARE REFORM; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 79955471020     PISSN: 00950696     EISSN: 10960449     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2010.11.004     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Alberini A., Krupnick A. Valuing the health effects of pollution. The International Yearbook of Environmental and Resource Economics 2001, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK. H. Folmer, T. Tietenberg (Eds.).
2. Allais P.M. Le comportement de l'homme rationnel devant le risque: critique des postulats et axiomes de l'ecole americaine. Econometrica 1953, 21:503-546.
3. Camerer C., Weber M. Recent developments in modeling preferences: uncertainty and ambiguity. J. Risk Uncertainty 1992, 5:325-370.
4. Cameron T.A. Updating subjective risks in the presence of conflicting information: an application to climate change. J. Risk Uncertainty 2005, 30:63-97.
5. Cameron T.A. Individual option prices for climate change mitigation. J. Public Econom. 2005, 89:283-301.
6. Carson R.T., Mitchell R.C. Public preferences toward environmental risks: the case of trihalomethanes. Handbook of Contingent Valuation 2000, Edward Elgar Press, Brookfield, VT. A. Alberini, D. Bjornstad, J. Kahn (Eds.).
7. Desvousges W.D., Kunreuther H., Slovic P., Rosa E.A. Perceived risk and attitudes toward nuclear waste: national and Nevada perspectives. Public Reactions to Nuclear Waste: Citizens' Views of Repository Siting 1993, Duke University Press, Durham, NC. R.E. Dunlap, M.E. Kraft, E.A. Rosa (Eds.).
8. Department of Energy. (DOE), Final environmental impact statement for a geologic repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada: summary, DOE/EIS-0250D, 2002.
9. Ellsberg D. Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms. Q. J. Econom. 1961, 75:643-669.
10. Feldstein M.S. Mean variance analysis in the theory of liquidity preference and portfolio selection. Rev. Econ. Stud. 1969, 36:5-12.
11. Flynn J., Slovic P. Yucca mountain: a crisis for policy: prospects for Americas high-level nuclear waste program. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 1995, 20:83-118.
12. Heckman J.J., Willis R.J. A beta-logistic model for the analysis of sequential labor force participation by married woman. J. Political Econ. 1977, 85:27-58.
13. Hirshleifer J., Riley J.G. The Analytics of Uncertainty and Information 1992, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK.
14. Honoré B.O., Lewbel A. Semiparametric binary choice panel data models without strictly exogeneous regressors. Econometrica 2002, 70:2053-2063.
15. Horowitz J.L. A smoothed maximum score estimator for the binary response model. Econometrica 1992, 60:505-532.
16. Khan B., Sarin R. Modeling ambiguity in decision-making under uncertainty. J. Consum. Res. 1988, 15:265-272.
17. Kovalev E.E., Chukhin S.G. Radiation risks and dose limits. At. Energy 1997, 82:311-312.
18. Lewbel A. Semiparametric qualitative response model estimation with unknown heteroscedasticity or instrumental variables. J. Econom. 2000, 97:145-177.
19. Loomis J., duVair P.H. Evaluating the effect of alternative risk communication devices on willingness to pay: results from a dichotomous choice contingent valuation experiment. Land Econ. 1993, 69:287-298.
20. Manski C. Semiparametric analysis of discrete response: asymptotic properties of the maximum score estimator. J. Econom. 1985, 27:313-334.
21. Olson C.A. An analysis of wage differential received by workers on dangerous jobs. J. Human Res. 1981, 16:167-185.
22. Pratt J.W. Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica 1964, 32:122-136.
23. Quiggin J. Generalized Expected Utility Theory. The Rank-Dependent Model 1993, Kluwer, Boston, MA, Dordrecht/London UK.
24. Riddel M. Risk perception, ambiguity, and nuclear-waste transport. South. Econ. J. 2009, 75:781-797.
25. Riddel M., Shaw W.D. A theoretically-consistent empirical model of non-expected utility: an application to nuclear-waste transport. J. Risk Uncertainty 2006, 32:131-150.
26. Riddel M., Keith Schwer R. Winners, losers, and the nuclear-waste dilemma. Environ. Res. Econ. 2006, 34:317-338.
27. Savage L.J. The Foundations of Statistics 1972, Wiley, New York, NY. 2nd edn.
28. Segal U. The Ellsberg paradox and risk aversion: an anticipated utility approach. Int. Econ. Rev. 1987, 28:175-202.
29. Shogren J., Crocker T. Risk, self-protection and ex ante economic value. J. Environ. Econom. Manage. 1991, 20:1-15.
30. Slovic P., Flynn J.H., Layman M. Perceived risk, trust, and the politics of nuclear waste. Science 1991, 254:1603-1607.
31. Slovic P., Flynn J.H., Layman M. Perceived risk, trust, and nuclear waste: lessons from Yucca Mountain. Public Reactions to Nuclear Waste: Citizens Views of Repository Siting 1993, Duke University Press, Durham, NC. R.E. Dunlap, M.E. Kraft, E.A. Rosa (Eds.).
32. Slovic P., Flynn J., Layman M. Perceived risk, trust, and the politics of nuclear waste. The Perception of Risk 2000, Eathscan, Sterling, VA. P. Slovic (Ed.).
33. Slovic P., Flynn J., Layman M. Risk perception, trust, and nuclear waste: lessons from Yucca Mountain. Environment 1991, 33:6-11.
34. Treich N. The value of a statistical life under ambiguity aversion. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 2009, 10.1016/j.jeem.2009.05.001.
35. Tversky A., Kahneman D. Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertainty 1992, 5:297-323.
36. Viscusi W.K. Prospective reference theory: toward an explanation of the paradoxes. J. Risk Uncertainty 1989, 2:253-264.
37. Viscusi W.K. Mortality effects of regulatory costs and policy evaluation criteria. Rand. J. Econ. 1994, 25:94-108.
38. Viscusi W.K., Magat W.A. Smoking status and public responses to ambiguous scientific risk evidence. J. Risk Uncertainty 1992, 5:371-387.
39. Viscusi W.K., Magat W.A., Huber J. Smoking status and public responses to ambiguous scientific risk evidence. South. Econ. J. 1999, 66:250-270.