Understanding how income influences willingness to pay for joint programs: A more equitable value measure for the less wealthy

Ecological Economics

Volumn 109, Issue , 2015, Pages 17-25

  Breffle, William S ^a   Eiswerth, Mark E ^b   Muralidharan, Daya ^a   Thornton, Jeffrey ^c  

^a MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN COLORADO   (United States)

^c for Golder Associates   (United States)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation; Environmental equity adjustment factor; Income effects; Ordered probit; Water quality; WTP versus WTA

Indexed keywords

ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM; AMENITY; ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS; EQUITY; ESTHETICS; INCOME DISTRIBUTION; POLLUTION EXPOSURE; PUBLIC GOODS; WATER QUALITY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 84911863807     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.10.001     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P., Leamer E., Radner R., Schuman H. Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Fed. Regist. 1993, 58(10):4602-4614.
2. Breffle W.S., Morey E.R., Lodder T.S. Using contingent valuation to estimate a neighborhood's willingness to pay to preserve undeveloped urban land. Urban Stud. 1998, 35(4):715-728.
3. Brookshire D.S., Schulze W.D., Thayer M.A., d'Arge R.C. Valuing public goods: a comparison of survey and hedonic approaches. Am. Econ. Rev. 1982, 72:165-177.
4. Brown T.C., Gregory R. Why the WTA-WTP disparity matters. Ecol. Econ. 1999, 28:323-335.
5. Cameron T.A., Huppert D.D. OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values with payment card interval data. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 1989, 17:230-246.
6. Chestnut L.C., Rowe R.D., Breffle W.S. Economic valuation of mortality risk reduction: preference estimates from the United States and Canada. Contemp. Econ. Policy 2012, 30(3):399-416.
7. Dwyer J.F., Bowes M.D. Concepts of value for marine recreational fishing. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1978, 51:1008-1012.
8. Frankhauser S., Tol R., Pearce D. The aggregation of climate change damages: a welfare theoretic approach. Environ. Resour. Econ. 1997, 10:249-266.
9. Hanemann W.M. Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: how much can they differ?. Am. Econ. Rev. 1991, 81:635-647.
10. Horowitz J.K., McConnell K.E. A review of WTA/WTP studies. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 2002, 44:426-447.
11. Horowitz J.K., McConnell K.E. Willingness to accept, willingness to pay, and the income effect. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 2003, 51:537-545.
12. Isoni A., Loomes G., Sugden R. The willingness to pay-willingness to accept gap, the "endowment effect", subject misconceptions, and experimental procedures for eliciting values: comment. Am. Econ. Rev. 2011, 101:991-1011.
13. Jacobsen J.B., Hanley N. Are there income differences on global willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation?. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2009, 43(2):137-160.
14. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 1979, 47:263-291.
15. Kahneman D., Knetsch J.L., Thaler R. Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the coase theorem. J. Polit. Econ. 1990, 98:1325-1348.
16. Markandya A. Poverty, income distribution, and policy making. Environ. Resour. Econ. 1998, 11(3):459-472.
17. Martin-Fernandez J., del Cura-Gonzalez M.I., Gomez-Gascon T., Oliva-Moreno J., Dominguez-Bidagor J., Beamud-Lagos M., Perez-Rivas F.J. Differences between willingness to pay and willingness to accept for visits by a family physician: a contingent valuation study. BMC Public Health 2010, 10:236.
18. Morrison G.C. Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: some evidence of an endowment effect. Appl. Econ. 1997, 29:411-417.
19. Plott C.R., Zeiler K. The willingness to pay-willingness to accept gap, the "endowment effect", subject misconceptions, and experimental procedures for eliciting values. Am. Econ. Rev. 2005, 95(3):530-545.
20. Plott C.R., Zeiler K. The willingness to pay-willingness to accept gap, the "endowment effect", subject misconceptions, and experimental procedures for eliciting values: reply. Am. Econ. Rev. 2011, 101:1012-1028.
21. Randall A., Stoll J.R. Consumer surplus in a commodity space. Am. Econ. Rev. 1980, 70. (490-455).
22. Schlaepfer F. Survey protocol and income effects in contingent valuation of public goods: a meta-analysis. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 57(3):415-429.
23. SEWRPC A lake protection plan for Cravath and Trippe Lakes: Walworth County, Wisconsin. Memorandum Report Number 191 2011, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC), Waukesha, WI, (145 pp.).
24. Vartia Y.O. Efficient methods of measuring welfare change and compensate income in terms of ordinary demand functions. Econometrica 1983, 51:79-98.
25. Willig R.D. Consumer's surplus without apology. Am. Econ. Rev. 1976, 66:589-597.
26. Zhao J., Kling C. A new explanation for the WTP/WTA disparity. Econ. Lett. 2001, 73:293-300.