ePrints

An experimental investigation of explanations for inconsistencies in responses to second offers in double referenda

Lookup NU author(s): Anthony Burton, Professor Susan Chilton

Downloads

Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.

Abstract

This paper demonstrates the potential for induced preference experiments to test previously unverified explanations of observed behavior in contingent valuation surveys. The NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation called for experimental evidence on potential biases in the double referendum format. We test Carson, Groves, and Machina's (Incentives and informational properties of preference questions, Plenary address to the European Association of Resource and Environmental Economists, Oslo, Norway, June 1999) simple cost uncertainty and weighted averaging explanations of inconsistent responses to follow-up offers in such double referenda against a baseline of certainty and truthful preference revelation. The results find evidence to support the Weighted Average hypothesis. Results regarding the cost uncertainty hypothesis are more ambiguous and merit further investigation.

Publication metadata

Author(s): Burton AC, Carson KS, Chilton SM, Hutchinson WG

Publication type: Article

Publication status: Published

Journal: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

Year: 2003

Volume: 46

Issue: 3

Pages: 472-489

Print publication date: 01/11/2003

ISSN (print): 0095-0696

ISSN (electronic): 1096-0449

Publisher: Academic Press

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0095-0696(03)00022-6

DOI: 10.1016/S0095-0696(03)00022-6

Altmetrics

Share