Is Cost–Benefit Analysis Anomaly-Proof?
AbstractIn this paper we examine whether cost–benefit analysis is anomaly-susceptible or anomaly-proof. To do this, we address four questions. These are, which anomalies, or problems seem most troublesome for CBA? What coping strategies does the analyst adopt to address these problems? Do these adaptation strategies create new problems? And finally, does adopting these strategies invalidate the results of CBA, or reduce the power of its advice? The anomalies we consider are (i) the observed differences between willingness to pay and willingness to accept compensation measures of value; (ii) valuation given information limits, preference uncertainty and preference construction; (iii) hypothetical market bias; (iv) risk perceptions; and (v) risk and preference reversals. We focus our discussion on the estimation of non-market environmental benefits and costs. Copyright Springer 2005
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists in its journal Environmental and Resource Economics.
Volume (Year): 32 (2005)
Issue (Month): 1 (09)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100263
anomalies; behavioural economics; cost–benefit analysis; preference reversals; rationality;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Richard Carson & Theodore Groves, 2007.
"Incentive and informational properties of preference questions,"
Environmental & Resource Economics,
European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 181-210, May.
- Carson, Richard T & Groves, Theodore, 2010. "Incentive and Information Properties of Preference Questions," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt88d8644g, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
- Todd L. Cherry & Jason F. Shogren, 2002.
02-03, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
- Shogren, Jason F., 2006. "Experimental Methods and Valuation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 969-1027 Elsevier.
- Huffman, Wallace E. & Shogren, Jason F. & Rousu, Matthew C. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2003.
"Consumer Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Food Labels in a Market with Diverse Information: Evidence from Experimental Auctions,"
Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics,
Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(03), December.
- Huffman, Wallace & Shogren, J. E. & Rousu, M. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2003. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Food Labels in a Market with Diverse Information: Evidence from Experimental Auctions," Staff General Research Papers 12256, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Nick Hanley & Jorunn Grande, & Begoña Álvarez-Farizo & Carol Salt & Mike Wilson, . "Risk perceptions, risk-reducing behaviour and willingness to pay: radioactive contamination in food following a nuclear accident," Working Papers 2001_4, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
- Todd L. Cherry & Thomas Crocker & Jason F. Shogren, 2001.
01-02, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
- Dan Ariely & George Loewenstein & Drazen Prelec, 2003. ""Coherent Arbitrariness": Stable Demand Curves Without Stable Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 118(1), pages 73-105, February.
- Andersson, Henrik & Svensson, Mikael, 2006.
"Cognitive Ability and Scale Bias in the Contingent Valuation Method,"
2006:2, Swedish National Road & Transport Research Institute (VTI).
- Henrik Andersson & Mikael Svensson, 2008. "Cognitive ability and scale bias in the contingent valuation method," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(4), pages 481-495, April.
- Andersson, Henrik & Svensson, Mikael, 2007. "Cognitive Ability and Scale Bias in the Contingent Valuation Method," Working Papers 2007:1, Swedish National Road & Transport Research Institute (VTI).
- Gowdy, John M., 2007. "Toward an experimental foundation for benefit-cost analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 649-655, September.
- Elisabeth Gsottbauer & Jeroen Bergh, 2011. "Environmental Policy Theory Given Bounded Rationality and Other-regarding Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(2), pages 263-304, June.
- Jason Shogren & Gregory Parkhurst & Prasenjit Banerjee, 2010. "Two Cheers and a Qualm for Behavioral Environmental Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(2), pages 235-247, June.
- Søren Olsen & Thomas Lundhede & Jette Jacobsen & Bo Thorsen, 2011. "Tough and Easy Choices: Testing the Influence of Utility Difference on Stated Certainty-in-Choice in Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(4), pages 491-510, August.
- R. Turner, 2007. "Limits to CBA in UK and European environmental policy: retrospects and future prospects," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 253-269, May.
- Watson, Verity & Ryan, Mandy, 2007. "Exploring preference anomalies in double bounded contingent valuation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 463-482, May.
- Schläpfer, Felix & Schmitt, Marcel & Roschewitz, Anna, 2008.
"Competitive politics, simplified heuristics, and preferences for public goods,"
Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 574-589, April.
- Felix Schlaepfer & Marcel Schmitt & Anna Roschewitz, 2007. "Competitive politics, simplified heuristics, and preferences for public goods," SOI - Working Papers 0712, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich.
- Venkatachalam, L., 2008. "Behavioral economics for environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 640-645, November.
- Lo, Alex Y. & Spash, Clive L., 2011. "Articulation of Plural Values in Deliberative Monetary Valuation: Beyond Preference Economisation and Moralisation," MPRA Paper 30002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Schlapfer, Felix & Schmitt, Marcel, 2007. "Anchors, endorsements, and preferences: A field experiment," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 229-243, September.
- Gunawardena, U.A.D. Prasanthi, 2010. "Inequalities and externalities of power sector: A case of Broadlands hydropower project in Sri Lanka," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 726-734, February.
- Colombo, Sergio & Hanley, Nicholas & Tinch, Dugald, 2010. "Differences between Decision and Experienced Utility: An Investigation using the Choice Experiment method," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2010-13, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
- Ladenburg, Jacob & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2008. "Gender-specific starting point bias in choice experiments: Evidence from an empirical study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 275-285, November.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.