Bridging the gap between the field and the lab: Environmental goods, policy maker input, and consequentiality

Christian Vossler and Mary Evans

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2009, vol. 58, issue 3, 338-345

Abstract: This paper explores the criterion validity of stated preference methods through experimental referenda that capture key characteristics of a stated preference survey for a proposed environmental program. In particular, we investigate whether advisory referenda, where participant votes have either known or unknown weight in the policy decision, can elicit values comparable to that of a standard, incentive-compatible referendum. When participants regard their votes as consequential, our results suggest there is no elicitation bias with advisory referenda. For advisory referenda where participants view their votes as inconsequential, and for purely hypothetical referenda, we observe elicitation bias.

Keywords: Experimental; referenda; Consequentiality; Stated; preferences; Willingness; to; pay; Policy; maker; input (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2009
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (84)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095-0696(09)00050-3
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jeeman:v:58:y:2009:i:3:p:338-345

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management is currently edited by M.A. Cole, A. Lange, D.J. Phaneuf, D. Popp, M.J. Roberts, M.D. Smith, C. Timmins, Q. Weninger and A.J. Yates

More articles in Journal of Environmental Economics and Management from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().