IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v84y1994i1p255-70.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Resolving Differences in Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept

Author

Listed:
  • Shogren, Jason F.
  • Seung Y. Shin
  • Dermot J. Hayes
  • James B. Kliebenstein

Abstract

This paper tests the conjecture that the divergence of willingness to pay and willingness to accept for identical goods is driven by the degree of substitution between goods. In contrast to well-known results for market goods with close substitutes (i.e., candy bars and coffee mugs), the authors' results indicate a convergence of willingness-to-pay and willingness-to-accept measures of value. However, for a nonmarket good with imperfect substitutes (i.e., reduced health risk), the divergence of willingness-to-pay and willingness-to-accept value measures is persistent, even with repeated market participation and full information on the nature of the good. Copyright 1994 by American Economic Association.

Suggested Citation

  • Shogren, Jason F. & Seung Y. Shin & Dermot J. Hayes & James B. Kliebenstein, 1994. "Resolving Differences in Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(1), pages 255-270, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:84:y:1994:i:1:p:255-70
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Don Coursey, 1987. "Markets and the measurement of value," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 291-297, October.
    2. Coppinger, Vicki M & Smith, Vernon L & Titus, Jon A, 1980. "Incentives and Behavior in English, Dutch and Sealed-Bid Auctions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(1), pages 1-22, January.
    3. 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 554-566, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    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:aea:aecrev:v:84:y:1994:i:1:p:255-70. 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: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    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.