Experimental Evidence on Alternative Environmental Valuation Methods

Experimental methods are central to assessments of environmental valuation approaches that are operationally meaningful. Existing lab experiments focus attention sharply on the neglect of hypothetical bias. They also offer constructive solutions to correct this bias, and beg for validation in field experiments.

[1]  Robert Sugden,et al.  Do Anomalies Disappear in Repeated Markets , 2002 .

[2]  J. Shogren,et al.  Cvm‐X: Calibrating Contingent Values with Experimental Auction Markets , 1998 .

[3]  H. Varian.  Non-parametric Tests of Consumer Behaviour , 1983 .

[4]  John B. Loomis,et al.  Improving Validity Experiments of Contingent Valuation Methods: Results of Efforts to Reduce the Disparity of Hypothetical and Actual Willingness to Pay , 1996 .

[5]  Glenn W. Harrison,et al.  Experimental Methods and Elicitation of Values , 2004 .

[6]  J. Sengupta.  The Nonparametric Approach , 1989 .

[7]  E. Rutström,et al.  Home-grown values and incentive compatible auction design , 1998 .

[8]  James F. Allen.  Natural language understanding , 1987, Bejnamin/Cummings series in computer science.

[9]  John A. List,et al.  Do explicit warnings eliminate the hypothetical bias in elicitation procedures? Evidence from field auctions for sportscards , 2001 .

[10]  John A. List,et al.  Calibration of Willingness-to-Accept☆ , 2002 .

[11]  Charles A. Holt,et al.  Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects , 2002 .

[12]  John D. Hey,et al.  Experimental Investigations of Errors in Decision Making under Risk Experimental investigations of errors in decision making under risk , 1995 .

[13]  Robert Cameron Mitchell,et al.  The Impact of "No Opinion" Response Options on Data Quality: Non-Attitude Reduction or an Invitation to Satisfice? , 2001 .

[14]  Baruch Fischhoff,et al.  Measuring values: A conceptual framework for interpreting transactions with special reference to contingent valuation of visibility , 1988 .

[15]  S. Afriat.  THE CONSTRUCTION OF UTILITY FUNCTIONS FROM EXPENDITURE DATA , 1967 .

[16]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Value elicitation: Is there anything in there? , 1991 .

[17]  John A. List,et al.  Calibration of the difference between actual and hypothetical valuations in a field experiment , 1998 .

[18]  Thomas C. Brown,et al.  Further tests of entreaties to avoid hypothetical bias in referendum contingent valuation , 2003 .

[19]  G. Harrison,et al.  Environmental Damage Assessment with Hypothetical Surveys: The Calibration Approach , 1999 .

[20]  H. Varian.  The Nonparametric Approach to Demand Analysis , 1982 .

[21]  H. P. Binswanger.  Attitudes toward risk: Experimental measurement in rural india , 1980 .

[22]  A. Myrick Freeman,et al.  The benefits of environmental improvement , 1979 .

[23]  Ronald M. Harstad,et al.  Information Impact and Allocation Rules in Auctions with Affiliated Private Values: A Laboratory Study , 1987 .

[24]  J. Whitehead,et al.  Are Hypothetical Referenda Incentive Compatible? A comment , 1999, Journal of Political Economy.

[25]  M. Satterthwaite.  Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions , 1975 .

[26]  G. Harrison,et al.  Must Contingent Valuation Surveys Cost So Much , 1996 .

[27]  Magnus Johannesson,et al.  Calibrating Hypothetical Willingness to Pay Responses , 1999 .

[28]  H. Varian.  A Solution to the Problem of Externalities When Agents Are Well-Informed , 1994 .

[29]  Mordecai Kurz.  Experimental approach to the determination of the demand for public goods , 1974 .

[30]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  A theory of auctions and competitive bidding , 1982 .

[31]  Magnus Johannesson,et al.  Experimental Results on Expressed Certainty and Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation , 1998 .

[32]  J. Louviere,et al.  Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities , 1994 .

[33]  J. Shogren,et al.  Price Information and Bidding Behavior in Repeated Second‐Price Auctions , 1999 .

[34]  D. Hensher,et al.  Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications , 2000 .

[35]  Glenn W. Harrison,et al.  Eliciting risk and time preferences using field experiments: Some methodological issues , 2006 .

[36]  V. Smith,et al.  Arbitrary values, good causes, and premature verdicts , 1992 .

[37]  Peter Martinsson,et al.  Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment , 2001 .

[38]  R. G. Cummings,et al.  Homegrown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous Choice Approach Incentive-Compatible? , 1995 .

[39]  R. G. Cummings,et al.  The measurement and decomposition of nonuse values: A critical review , 1995 .

[40]  W. Hanemann,et al.  A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting From the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill , 1992 .

[41]  David Aadland,et al.  Willingness to Pay for Curbside Recycling with Detection and Mitigation of Hypothetical Bias , 2003 .

[42]  James Kliebenstein,et al.  Valuing Food Safety in Experimental Auction Markets , 1995 .

[43]  V. Kerry Smith,et al.  Can We Measure the Economic Value of Environmental Amenities , 1990 .

[44]  O. Johansson-Stenman,et al.  SELF IMAGE AND CHOICE EXPERIMENTS: HYPOTHETICAL AND ACTUAL WILLINGNESS TO PAY , 2003 .

[45]  V. Smith.  Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science , 1982 .

[46]  Robert Cameron Mitchell,et al.  Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method , 1989 .

[47]  J. Shogren,et al.  Resolving Differences in Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept , 1997 .

[48]  Glenn W. Harrison,et al.  Statistical Bias Functions and Informative Hypothetical Surveys , 1994 .

[49]  M. Coller,et al.  Eliciting Individual Discount Rates , 1999 .

[50]  D. Dillman.  Mail and telephone surveys : the total design method , 1979 .

[51]  F. Rhodes.  Rules of the Game , 1997, Science.

[52]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Combining sources of preference data , 1998 .

[53]  Glenn W. Harrison,et al.  Hypothetical Bias and Willingness to Accept , 2003 .

[54]  Helen R. Neill,et al.  Hypothetical Surveys and Real Economic Commitments , 1994 .

[55]  Dale J. Menkhaus,et al.  Using Laboratory Experimental Auctions in Marketing Research: A Case Study of New Packaging for Fresh Beef , 1993 .

[56]  H. Moulin.  Axioms of Cooperative Decision Making , 1988 .

[57]  R. G. Cummings,et al.  Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method , 1999 .

[58]  Robin Gregory,et al.  Do Reminders of Substitutes and Budget Constraints Influence Contingent Valuation Estimates , 1994 .

[59]  Morten I. Lau,et al.  Estimating Individual Discount Rates in Denmark: A Field Experiment , 2002 .

[60]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem , 1990, Journal of Political Economy.

[61]  Glenn W. Harrison,et al.  Risk Attitudes in First-Price Auction Experiments: A Bayesian Analysis , 1990 .

[62]  R. G. Cummings,et al.  Does Realism Matter in Contingent Valuation Surveys , 1998 .

[63]  J. Louviere,et al.  The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models , 1993 .

[64]  R. Kopp,et al.  Contingent Valuation and Lost Passive Use: Damages from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill , 2003 .

[65]  John W. Payne,et al.  Where Do the Numbers Come From? How People Respond to Contingent Valuation Questions , 1993 .

[66]  G. Harrison,et al.  Field experiments , 1924, The Journal of Agricultural Science.

[67]  Nicholas E. Flores,et al.  Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence , 2000 .

[68]  Gregory L. Poe,et al.  Alternative Non-market Value-Elicitation Methods: Are the Underlying Preferences the Same? , 2002 .

[69]  J. Lindén,et al.  Eliciting Reservation Prices: Becker–Degroot–Marschak Mechanisms vs. Markets , 1997 .

[70]  John A. List,et al.  Preference Learning in Consecutive Experimental Auctions , 2000 .

[71]  M Johannesson,et al.  Hypothetical versus real willingness to pay in the health care sector: results from a field experiment. , 2001, Journal of health economics.

[72]  Robert P. Berrens,et al.  Examining the Role of Social Isolation on Stated Preferences , 2004 .

[73]  Ronald M. Harstad.  Dominant Strategy Adoption and Bidders' Experience with Pricing Rules , 2000 .

[74]  G. Harrison.  Theory and Misbehavior of First-Price Auctions , 1989 .

[75]  P. Samuelson.  A Note on the Pure Theory of Consumer's Behaviour , 1938 .

[76]  Richard T. Carson,et al.  Referendum Design and Contingent Valuation: The NOAA Panel's No-Vote Recommendation , 1998, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[77]  T. Schroeder,et al.  Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks , 2004 .

[78]  A. Gibbard.  Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result , 1973 .

[79]  R. Carson,et al.  Contingent Valuation: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests Since the NOAA Panel , 1997 .

[80]  R. G. Cummings,et al.  Are Hypothetical Referenda Incentive Compatible? , 1997, Journal of Political Economy.

[81]  Glenn W. Harrison,et al.  Theory and Misbehavior of First-Price Auctions: Reply , 1992 .

[82]  James J. Murphy.  An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias in Voluntary Contribution Contingent Valuation : Does Cheap Talk Matter ? , 2002 .

[83]  J. Shogren.  Experimental Methods and Valuation , 2005 .