This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Mesurer les préférences du consommateur pour orienter les décisions des pouvoirs publics : l’apport de la méthode expérimentale

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Stéphane Robin (GATE - Groupe d'analyse et de théorie économique - CNRS : UMR5824 - Université Lumière - Lyon II - Ecole Normale Supérieure Lettres et Sciences Humaines)
Anne Rozan () (UMR GSP - Gestion des services publics - CEMAGREF - Ecole Nationale du Génie de l'Eau et de l'Environnement de Strasbourg)
Bernard Ruffieux () (GAEL - Economie Appliquée de Grenoble - INRA : UR1215 - Université Pierre Mendès-France - Grenoble II)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

La prise en compte de l'intérêt du citoyen dans la décision publique passe par l'estimation des préférences individuelles face à différents choix collectifs. Dès lors qu'il n'existe pas de marché de référence, mesurer l'impact d'une décision publique sur le bien-être des individus pose un vrai problème méthodologique. En dépit des nombreuses améliorations apportées à ces méthodes, l'enquête d'opinion ou l'évaluation contingente produisent des mesures altérées par différents biais. L'économie expérimentale constitue une méthodologie intéressante en permettant une mesure directe de la valeur qu'attribue un individu pour un choix, un scénario ou un bien non marchand. L'utilisation de cette méthode comme outil d'aide à la décision publique est croissante. Nous nous proposons dans cet article de faire une présentation de cette démarche. Précisément, cet article répond aux deux questions suivantes : Pourquoi faire de l'évaluation des préférences en laboratoire ? Comment conduire une telle investigation ?

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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.

File URL: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/19/63/10/PDF/0723.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by HAL in its series Post-Print with number hal-00196310_v1.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00196310_v1

Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00196310/en/
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (CCSD).

Related research
Keywords: décision publique; économie expérimentale; évaluation de préférences individuelles;

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
  1. Lusk, Jayson L. & Jamal, Mustafa & Kurlander, Lauren & Roucan, Maud & Taulman, Lesley, 2005. "A Meta-Analysis of Genetically Modified Food Valuation Studies," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(01), April. [Downloadable!]
  2. Roosen, Jutta & Fox, John A. & Hennessy, David A. & Schreiber, Alan, 1998. "Consumers' Valuation Of Insecticide Use Restrictions: An Application To Apples," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 23(02), December. [Downloadable!]
  3. Noussair, Charles & Robin, Stephane & Ruffieux, Bernard, 2004. "Revealing consumers' willingness-to-pay: A comparison of the BDM mechanism and the Vickrey auction," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 725-741, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Irwin, Julie R, et al, 1998. "Payoff Dominance vs. Cognitive Transparency in Decision Making," Economic Inquiry, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 272-85, April.
  5. Bohm, Peter, 1972. "Estimating demand for public goods: An experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 111-130. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Carson, Richard T. & Hanemann, W. Michael, 2006. "Contingent Valuation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 17, pages 821-936 Elsevier. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Cox, James C & Smith, Vernon L & Walker, James M, 1992. "Theory and Misbehavior of First-Price Auctions: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1392-412, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Buzby, Jean C. & Fox, John A. & Ready, Richard C. & Crutchfield, Stephen R., 1998. "Measuring Consumer Benefits Of Food Safety Risk Reductions," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(01), July. [Downloadable!]
  9. Knetsch, Jack L, 1989. "The Endowment Effect and Evidence of Nonreversible Indifference Curves," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1277-84, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Lusk, Jayson L. & Fox, John A., 2003. "Value elicitation in retail and laboratory environments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 27-34, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Kanninen Barbara J., 1995. "Bias in Discrete Response Contingent Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 114-125, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  13. Herriges, Joseph A. & Shogren, Jason F., 1996. "Starting Point Bias in Dichotomous Choice Valuation with Follow-Up Questioning," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 112-131, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  14. Diamond, Peter A & Hausman, Jerry A, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  15. Horowitz, John K. & McConnell, Kenneth E., 2002. "A Review of WTA/WTP Studies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 426-447, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  16. Charles Noussair & StÈphane Robin & Bernard Ruffieux, 2004. "Do Consumers Really Refuse To Buy Genetically Modified Food?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(492), pages 102-120, 01. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  17. Buhr, Brian L. & Hayes, Dermot J. & Shogren, Jason F. & Kliebenstein, James B., 1993. "Valuing Ambiguity: The Case Of Genetically Engineered Growth Enhancers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 18(02), December. [Downloadable!]
  18. Noussair, Charles & Robin, Stephane & Ruffieux, Bernard, 2002. "Do consumers not care about biotech foods or do they just not read the labels?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 47-53, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  19. Kagel, John H & Harstad, Ronald M & Levin, Dan, 1987. "Information Impact and Allocation Rules in Auctions with Affiliated Private Values: A Laboratory Study," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(6), pages 1275-1304, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  20. Anne Rozan & Anne Stenger & Marc Willinger, 2004. "Willingness-to-pay for food safety: an experimental investigation of quality certification on bidding behaviour," Framed Field Experiments 0065, The Field Experiments Website.
  21. Glenn W. Harrison & Ronald M. Harstad & E. Elisabet Rutstr–m, 2004. "Experimental Methods and Elicitation of Values," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 123-140, 06. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  22. Jack Knetsch & Fang-Fang Tang & Richard Thaler, 2001. "The Endowment Effect and Repeated Market Trials: Is the Vickrey Auction Demand Revealing?," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 257-269, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  23. Kagel, J.H. & Levin, D., 1988. "Independent Private Value Auctions: Bidder Behavior In First, Second And Third-Price Auctions With Varying Numbers Of Bidders," Papers 13, Houston - Department of Economics.
    Other versions:
  24. Hayes, Dermot J. & Shogren, Jason F. & Shin, Seung Youll & Kliebenstein, James B., 1995. "Valuing Food Safety in Experimental Auction Markets," Staff General Research Papers 835, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  25. Brookshire, David S & Coursey, Don L, 1987. "Measuring the Value of a Public Good: An Empirical Comparison of Elicitation Procedures," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(4), pages 554-66, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  26. Shogren, Jason F. & Margolis, Michael & Koo, Cannon & List, John A., 2001. "A random nth-price auction," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 409-421, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? It is the publishers that input data about their publications, as there is no staff at RePEc.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-28.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.