Willingness-to-pay and policy-instrument choice for climate-change policy in the United States

Energy Policy

Volumn 55, Issue , 2013, Pages 617-625

  Kotchen, Matthew J ^a,b   Boyle, Kevin J ^c   Leiserowitz, Anthony A ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH   (United States)

^c VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Instrument choice; US climate policy; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

A-CARBON; CAP-AND-TRADE PROGRAM; CLIMATE POLICY; HOUSEHOLD INCOME; POLICY INSTRUMENTS; POLITICAL PARTIES; SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

GAS EMISSIONS; GLOBAL WARMING; GREENHOUSE GASES; SURVEYS;

INSTRUMENTS;

CLIMATE CHANGE; EMISSION CONTROL; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; GREENHOUSE GAS; POLLUTION TAX; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84873159988     PISSN: 03014215     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.12.058     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Arrow K., Solow R., Leamer R., Portney P., Radner R., Schuman H. Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Federal Register 1993, 58:4601-46124.
2. Cameron T.Ann Individual option prices for climate change mitigation. Journal of Public Economics 2005, 89(2-3):283-301.
3. Carlsson, F. Kataria, M. Krupnick, A. J. Lampi, E. Lofgren, Å. Qin, P. Chung, S. Sterner, T. 2010. Paying For Mitigation: A Multiple Country Study. RFF Discussion Paper 10-33. Washington, DC: Resources for the future.
4. Carson R.T., Hanemann W.M., Kopp R.J., Krosnick J.A., Mitchell R.C., Presser S., Ruud P.A., Smith V.K., Conaway M., Martin K. Referendum design and contingent valuation: the NOAA Panel's no-vote recommendation. Review of Economics and Statistics 1998, 80:335-338.
5. Champ P.A., Boyle K.J., Brown T.C. A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation 2003, Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands.
6. Congressional Budget Office, 2009 The Estimated Costs to Households From the Cap-and-Trade Provisions of H.R. 2454, June 19, 2009.
7. Diamond P.A., Hausman J.A. Contingent valuation: is some number better than no number?. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1994, 8:45-64.
8. Greenstone Michael, Elizabeth Kopits, Ann Wolverton Estimating the social cost of carbon for use in U.S. federal rulemakings: a summary and interpretation. NBER Working Paper 2011, 16913.
9. Hanemann M. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1994, 8:19-43.
10. Hökby S., Söderqvist T. Elasticities of demand and willingness to pay for environmental services in Sweden. Environmental and Resource Economics 2003, 26:361-383.
11. Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon, United States Government. 2010. Technical support Document: Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866.
12. Kristrom B., Riera P. Is the income elasticity of environmental improvements less than one?. Environmental and Resource Economics 1996, 7:45-55.
13. Krosnick J.A., Holbrook A.L., Berent M.K., Carson R.T., Hanemann W.M., Kopp R.J., Mitchell R.C., Presser S., Ruud P.A., Smith V.K., Moody W.R., Green M.C., Conaway M. The impact of 'no opinion' response options on data quality. The Public Opinion Quarterly 2002, 66:371-403.
14. Kotchen, M.J., E.T. Mansur. 2012. How Stringent is the EPA's Proposed Carbon Pollution Standard for New Power Plants? UC Center For Energy And Environmental Economics, Working paper WP_039.
15. Layton D.F., Brown G. Heterogeneous preferences regarding global climate change. Review of Economics and Statistics 2000, Vol. 82(4):616-624.
16. Metcalf G.E., Weisbach D. The design of a carbon tax. Harvard Environmental Law Review 2009, 33(2):499-506.
17. Mitchell R.C., Caron R.T. Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method 1989, Resources for the Future Press, Washington DC.
18. Nordhaus W.D. Carbon taxes to move toward fiscal sustainability. The Economists' Voice 2010, 7(3). Article 3.
19. Pidgeon N., Fischhoff B. The role of social and decision sciences in communicating uncertain climate risks. Nature Climate Change 2011, 1:35-41.
20. Portney P.R. The contingent valuation debate: why economists should care?. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1994, 8:3-17.
21. Sterman J.D. Communicating climate change risks in a skeptical world. Climatic Change 2011, 108:811-826.
22. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2010a. Supplemental EPA Analysis of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, January 29, 2010.
23. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2010b. EPA Analysis of the American Power Act of 2010, June 14, 2010.
24. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2010c. Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses, December 2010.
25. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a. Climate Change - Regulatory Initiatives, , accessed April 7, 2011. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/initiatives/index.html.
26. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011b. Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions, , accessed April 11, 2011. http://www.epa.gov/airquality/ghgsettlement.html.
27. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2012. EPA FACT SHEET: Proposed Carbon Pollution Standard for New Power Plants, available at http://www.epa.gov/carbonpollutionstandard/pdfs/20120327factsheet.pdf.
28. Viscusi W.K., Zeckhauser R.J. The perception and valuation of the risks of climate change: a rational and behavioral blend. Climatic Change 2006, 77(1-2):151-177.