The effect of varying the causes of environmental problems on stated WTP values : Evidence from a field study

By Erwin H. Bulte, Aart de Zeeuw, S. Gerking, John A. List. 2005

257 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9324f5d98ff9a739948e71211a64505dd9d5910b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In General Decision Sciences

In Safety Research

Citations in the corpus

The Nonmarket Benefits of Nature (2006, unknown): “However, it should be noted that underlying processes can affect valuation of outcomes, at least experimentally (Bulte et al. 2005).”
Using Ex Ante Approaches to Obtain Credible Signals for Value in Contingent Markets: Evidence from the Field (2007, unknown): “Bulte et al. (2005) explore cheap talk and consequentialism within the same experimental design but unfortunately have no actual values due to the nature of their good. real referenda.”
The Determinants of Individuals' Attitudes Towards Preventing Environmental Damage (2007, methodology): “Income has in general been considered in the literature (Whitehead 1991, Stevens et al. 1994, Blomquist and Whitehead 1998, Popp 2001, Witzke and Urfei 2001, Bulte et al. 2004, Dupont 2004, Israel and Levinson 2004, Veisten et al. 2004, Hidano et al. 2005).”
Augmenting short Cheap Talk scripts with a repeated Opt-Out Reminder in Choice Experiment surveys (2014, methodology): “This is a well-known limitation in applications considering these types of goods (Aadland and Capland 2003, Bulte et al. 2005, Carlsson et al. 2005, Lusk 2003).”
Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods (2021, background): “This has been shown in the CV literature of nonmarket valuation to have comparable effects to that of a cheap talk script (Bulte et al., 2005).”
Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies (2017, methodology): “Scenario design should also recognize that elicited welfare measures can be influenced by the mechanisms or processes used to achieve changes (Bulte et al. 2005; Johnston and Duke 2007; Bosworth, Cameron, and DeShazo 2010).”
What are the consequences of consequentiality (2009, background): “fl; ~ §; ~ fijc;w) / p(c;wj~c⁄;w⁄; ~ fl; ~ §; ~ fi)p(~c⁄;w⁄j~ fl; ~ §; ~ fi)p(~ fl)p(~ §)p(fi) ( 5 )”
Differences in Preferences Towards the Environment: The Impact of a Gender, Age and Parental Effect (2008, unknown): “1 It has been shown that the preferences to protect the environment (regarding causes and consequences of environmental damages) depend on the level of information the questionnaire includes (Bulte et al., 2005).”
Understanding Hypothetical Bias: An Enhanced Meta‐Analysis (2018, background): “For example, Bulte et al. (2005) found that an ex ante consequentiality script significantly lowered WTP, Interis and Petrolia (2014) found that ex post perceptions of consequentiality affect welfare estimates, and Herriges et al. (2010) implemented both.”
Understanding the consequences of consequentiality: Testing the validity of stated preferences in the field (2012, unknown): “In a survey of Dutch households on seal protection policies, Bulte et al. (2005) find that including information on how results would be shared with policy makers decreases estimated willingness to pay (WTP).”
Using cheap talk as a test of validity in choice experiments (2005, background): “A somewhat different approach that can be called a consequential script has recently been suggested by Bulte et al. (2005), inspired by the work of Carson et al. (2004).”