Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment

By Fredrik Carlsson, Peter Martinsson. 2001

618 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9c61bf90037eb2e1872770b68f958124ad5f58c6

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

Consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare: mobile abattoirs versus transportation to slaughter (2007, background): “Several studies have also shown that the estimated marginal rates of substitution probably do not suffer from hypothetical bias ( Carlsson and Martinsson, 2001; Lusk and Schroeder, 2004).”
Valuing wetland attributes: an application of choice experiments (2003, background): “Both Carlsson and Martinsson (2001) and Layton and Brown (2000) perform similar tests and fail to reject the stability hypothesis. al Economics 47 (2003) 95–103 3.2.”
A choice experiment on fuel taxation and earmarking in Norway (2011, methodology): “The approach has been applied extensively within inter alia transport studies (pionered by McFadden 1974), marketing (see e.g. Carson et al 1994) and valuation of non-market goods(e.g. Hanley et al. 1998; Carlsson and Martinsson 2001; Campbell et al. 2008).”
Using Respondent Uncertainty to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in a Stated Choice Experiment (2010, background): “Turning to studies that did not include an opt-out option, Carlsson and Martinsson (2001) asked respondents about hypotheti- cal choices over different donations to wildlife programs, followed by identical real choices.”
Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation (2001, methodology): “Carlsson and Martinsson (2001) conduct tests of transitivity and they do not find any strong indications of violations.”
Experimental Evidence on Alternative Environmental Valuation Methods (2006, neutral): “Carlsson and Martinsson (2001) allow subjects to allocate real money to two environmental projects, varying three characteristics: the amount of money the subject personally receives, the amount of money donated to an environmental project by the researchers, and the specific World Wildlife”
Behavioral change for the circular economy: A review with focus on electronic waste management in the EU (2020, background): “Hypothetical bias is also a pronounced issue, which suggest that the WTP preference may vary between hypothetical and real settings but findings are not conclusive (Aadland and Caplan, 2003; Carlsson and Martinsson, 2001).”
Incorporating Discontinuous Preferences into the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments (2008, result): “This is similar to a number of studies which have specified separate scale factors to test for the effects of learning, fatigue, complexity and consistency (see, for example, Sælensminde, 2001; Breffle and Rowe, 2002; Dellaert et al., 1999; Carlsson and Martinsson, 2001).”
The Value of Working Conditions in the United States and Implications for the Structure of Wages (2018, background): “7 including environmental policy (Carlsson and Martinsson, 2001; Carson, 2012), consumer preferences (Revelt and Train, 1998), labor supply (Kimball and Shapiro, 2008), retirement decisions (van Soest and Vonkova, 2014), and long-term care (Ameriks et al.”
Gender-specific starting point bias in choice experiments: Evidence from an empirical study (2008, methodology): “accordingly improve the reliability of value estimates obtained in CE [ 20 ,23,27,46,51].”
Comparing Willingness to Pay for Organic, Natural, Locally Grown, and State Marketing Program Promoted Foods in the Mid-Atlantic Region (2011, background): “Carlsson and Martinsson (2001) used a CE of donations for different types of environmental projects to examine hypothetical bias in mWTP estimates.”