IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?


  • Hanemann, W Michael


No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Hanemann, W Michael, 1991. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 635-647, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:81:y:1991:i:3:p:635-47

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See for details.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Thayer, Mark A., 1981. "Contingent valuation techniques for assessing environmental impacts: Further evidence," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 27-44, March.
    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. Catherine Heyes & Anthony Heyes, 1999. "Willingness to Pay Versus Willingness to Travel: Assessing the Recreational Benefits from Dartmoor National Park," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 124-139, January.
    2. George H. Lentz & Ko Wang, 1998. "Residential Appraisal and the Lending Process: A Survey of Issues," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 15(1), pages 11-40.
    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. Bergstrom, John C. & Dillman, B.L. & Stoll, John R., 1985. "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits Of Private Land: The Case Of Prime Agricultural Land," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(1), pages 1-11, July.
    5. Hoehn, John P. & Randall, Alan, 1985. "Demand Based And Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Comparison," 1985 Annual Meeting, August 4-7, Ames, Iowa 278557, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Caroline Gauthier, 2000. "Révélation du CAP : question ouverte ou question fermée ? Une application à la biodiversité des forêts riveraines de la Garonne," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 143(2), pages 237-245.
    7. Bakkenbüll, Linn-Brit & Dilger, Alexander, 2016. "Willingness to pay and accept for hosting Olympic Games in Germany," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 11/2016, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    8. Ukwueze Ezebuilo & Ogujiuba Kanayo & Adenuga Adeniyi, 2005. "How Useful Is Contingent Valuation Of The Environment To Water Services? Evidence From South East, Nigeria," Econometrics 0512012, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Smith, V. Kerry, . "Some Issues In Discrete Response Contingent Valuation Studies," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 14(1), pages 1-4.
    10. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    11. Spash, Clive L., 2008. "The Contingent Valuation Method: Retrospect and Prospect," MPRA Paper 101234, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Praktiknjo, Aaron J., 2014. "Stated preferences based estimation of power interruption costs in private households: An example from Germany," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 82-90.
    13. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods," Papers 2102.02945,
    14. Elizabeth Waithanji & Nadhem Mtimet & Pauline Muindi, 2019. "Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia Vaccine Delivery and Adoption by Women and Men in North-Eastern Kenya," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(3), pages 364-387, July.
    15. Chase, Lisa C. & Lee, David R. & Anderson, Deborah J. & Schulze, William D., 1997. "Ecotourism Demand And Differential Pricing Of National Park Entrance Fees In Costa Rica," Working Papers 127852, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    16. Jorgensen, Bradley S. & Syme, Geoffrey J. & Nancarrow, Blair E., 2006. "The role of uncertainty in the relationship between fairness evaluations and willingness to pay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 104-124, January.
    17. Kevin J. Boyle & Richard C. Bishop & Michael P. Welsh, 1985. "Starting Point Bias in Contingent Valuation Bidding Games," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(2), pages 188-194.
    18. Cook, David & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Kristófersson, Daði Már, 2018. "Willingness to pay for the preservation of geothermal areas in Iceland – The contingent valuation studies of Eldvörp and Hverahlíð," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(PA), pages 97-108.
    19. Dilger, Alexander & Bakkenbüll, Linn-Brit, 2016. "Zahlungsbereitschaften für deutsche Erfolge bei den Olympischen Winterspielen 2014 in Sotschi und die Austragung Olympischer Spiele in Deutschland," Discussion Papers of the Institute for Organisational Economics 05/2016, University of Münster, Institute for Organisational Economics.
    20. Stoll, John R., 1983. "Recreational Activities And Nonmarket Valuation: The Conceptualization Issue," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 15(2), pages 1-7, December.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:aea:aecrev:v:81:y:1991:i:3:p:635-47. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael P. Albert). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.