Payment and Provision Consequentiality in Voluntary Contribution Mechanism: Single or Double “Knife-Edge” Evidence?
Jie He (),
Jérôme Dupras () and
Thomas G. Poder
Additional contact information
Jie He: Département d'économique, École de gestion, Université de Sherbrooke
Jérôme Dupras: UQO
Thomas G. Poder: Centre de Recherche du CHUS, Université de Sherbrooke
Cahiers de recherche from Departement d'Economique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke
We conducted a field stated preferences survey to understand the joint and separate effects of payment and provision consequences on hypothetical bias associated with voluntary contribution. Based on four treatment groups and a contingent-ranking willingness to pay (WTP) question, this paper provides some support for “single” knife-edge evidence, which suggests that a respondent facing positive provision consequences will report a significantly higher preference only if the payment consequence is co-presented. For the payment consequence, its negative impact on WTP was independent on the presence of provision consequence; we therefore reject the “double” knife-edge evidence.
Keywords: hypothetical bias; knife-edge evidence; payment consequence; provision consequence; contingent ranking; voluntary donation; ecosystem services valuation. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-dcm, nep-knm and nep-mac
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:shr:wpaper:18-02
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Cahiers de recherche from Departement d'Economique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Luc Savard ().