IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/badest/0791.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Anchoring Effect in Context of a Familiar Good: A Case Study of Irrigation Water Supply in Rural India

Author

Listed:
  • BISWAS, DURBA

    (Post doctoral fellow at Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE))

Abstract

Literature shows that the presence of anchoring effect invalidates contingent valuation results. However, studies from developing countries have not addressed this phenomenon adequately. In this paper, indication of anchoring effect was tested using results from a contingent valuation exercise for a familiar good – canal irrigation water used by farmers – in a rural region of India. A single bound dichotomous choice question was followed up by a final open-ended question about the respondents’ maximum willingness to pay for improved water supply. Anchoring effect was not detected which is consistent with the argument that familiarity reduces anchoring. Furthermore, validity tested through a scope insensitivity test shows that the estimated economic values are valid.

Suggested Citation

  • Biswas, Durba, 2015. "Anchoring Effect in Context of a Familiar Good: A Case Study of Irrigation Water Supply in Rural India," Bangladesh Development Studies, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS), vol. 38(4), pages 91-98, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:badest:0791
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://bids.org.bd/uploads/publication/BDS/38/38-4/04_Anchoring%20effect%20in%20context%20of%20a%20familiar%20good.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Silverman, Jonathan & Klock, Mark, 1989. "The behavior of respondents in contingent valuation: Evidence on starting bids," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 51-60.
    2. Raje, D. V. & Dhobe, P. S. & Deshpande, A. W., 2002. "Consumer's willingness to pay more for municipal supplied water: a case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 391-400, September.
    3. Richard T. Carson, 2012. "Contingent Valuation: A Practical Alternative When Prices Aren't Available," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 27-42, Fall.
    4. Jorgensen, Bradley S. & Syme, Geoffrey J., 2000. "Protest responses and willingness to pay: attitude toward paying for stormwater pollution abatement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 251-265, May.
    5. Dambala Gelo & Steven F. Koch, 2011. "Contingent Valuation of Community Forestry Programs in Ethiopia: Observing Preference Anomalies in Double-Bounded CVM," Working Papers 201124, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    6. Durba Biswas & L. Venkatachalam, 2015. "Farmers' Willingness to Pay for Improved Irrigation Water — A Case Study of Malaprabha Irrigation Project in Karnataka, India," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(01), pages 1-24.
    7. Jonathan E. Alevy & Craig E. Landry & John A. List, 2015. "Field Experiments On The Anchoring Of Economic Valuations," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 53(3), pages 1522-1538, July.
    8. Whittington, Dale & Briscoe, John & Mu, Xinming & Barron, William, 1990. "Estimating the Willingness to Pay for Water Services in Developing Countries: A Case Study of the Use of Contingent Valuation Surveys in Southern Haiti," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 293-311, January.
    9. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, 2002. "Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2427.
    10. Weldesilassie, Alebel B. & Fror, Oliver & Boelee, Eline & Dabbert, Stephan, 2009. "The Economic Value of Improved Wastewater Irrigation: A Contingent Valuation Study in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(3), pages 1-22, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. MEZGEBO, Alem & GETA, Endrias & ZELEKE, Fresenbet, 2016. "Urban Freshwater Users Willingness To Pay For Upland Degraded Watershed Management: The Case Of Dechatu In Dire Dawa Administration, Ethiopia," Review of Agricultural and Applied Economics (RAAE), Faculty of Economics and Management, Slovak Agricultural University in Nitra, vol. 19(1), pages 1-8, March.
    2. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
    3. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Gurluk, Serkan, 2006. "The estimation of ecosystem services' value in the region of Misi Rural Development Project: Results from a contingent valuation survey," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 209-218, December.
    5. Lee, Kyung-Sook & Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2021. "Would people pay a price premium for electricity from domestic wind power facilities? The case of South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    6. Daniel R. Petrolia & Matthew G. Interis & Joonghyun Hwang, 2018. "Single-Choice, Repeated-Choice, and Best-Worst Scaling Elicitation Formats: Do Results Differ and by How Much?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(2), pages 365-393, February.
    7. Ulrich J Frey & Frauke Pirscher, 2018. "Willingness to pay and moral stance: The case of farm animal welfare in Germany," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-20, August.
    8. Laia Soler & Nicolas Borzykowski, 2021. "The costs of celiac disease: a contingent valuation in Switzerland," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(9), pages 1487-1505, December.
    9. Paul Mwebaze & Jeff Bennett & Nigel W. Beebe & Gregor J. Devine & Paul Barro, 2018. "Economic Valuation of the Threat Posed by the Establishment of the Asian Tiger Mosquito in Australia," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(2), pages 357-379, October.
    10. Petter Gudding & Gorm Kipperberg & Craig Bond & Kelly Cullen & Eric Steltzer, 2018. "When a Good Is a Bad (or a Bad Is a Good)—Analysis of Data from an Ambiguous Nonmarket Valuation Setting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, January.
    11. Gebreegziabher, Z. & Mekonnen, A. & Beyene, A.D. & Hagos, F., 2018. "Valuation of access to irrigation water in rural Ethiopia: application of choice experiment and contingent valuation methods," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Gebretsadik, Kidanemariam Abreha & Romstad, Eirik, 2020. "Climate and farmers’ willingness to pay for improved irrigation water supply," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    13. Kemeze, Francis H., 2020. "Demand for Supplemental Irrigation via Small-Scale Water Harvesting," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304569, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Ireri, Dave Mwagi, 2017. "Determination Of Willingness To Pay For Irrigation Water Institutions Among Smallholder Farming Households In Mbeere South, Kenya," Research Theses 276429, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    15. Baker, Rick & Ruting, Brad, 2014. "Environmental Policy Analysis: A Guide to Non‑Market Valuation," 2014 Conference (58th), February 4-7, 2014, Port Macquarie, Australia 165810, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    16. Mujuka, Esther & Mburu, John & Ackello-Ogutu, Chris & Ambuko, Jane, 2021. "Willingness to Pay for Postharvest Technologies and Its Influencing Factors Among Smallholder Mango Farmers in Kenya," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315331, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Dambala Gelo & Steven F. Koch, 2011. "Contingent Valuation of Community Forestry Programs in Ethiopia: Observing Preference Anomalies in Double-Bounded CVM," Working Papers 201124, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    18. Gelo, Dambala & Koch, Steven F., 2015. "Contingent valuation of community forestry programs in Ethiopia: Controlling for preference anomalies in double-bounded CVM," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 79-89.
    19. Irina Klytchnikova & Michael Lokshin, 2009. "Measuring Welfare Gains from Better Quality Infrastructure," Journal of Infrastructure Development, India Development Foundation, vol. 1(2), pages 87-109, December.
    20. Michael Kaplowitz & Frank Lupi & Oscar Arreola, 2012. "Local Markets for Payments for Environmental Services: Can Small Rural Communities Self-Finance Watershed Protection?," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(13), pages 3689-3704, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Irrigation Water; Contingent Valuation; Anchoring Effect; Construct Validity; Developing Country;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:badest:0791. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Meftaur Rahman, Cheif Publication Officer, BIDS (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bidssbd.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.