IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/jlaare/31215.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing for Budget Constraint Effects in a National Advisory Referendum Survey on the Kyoto Protocol

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Hui
  • Berrens, Robert P.
  • Bohara, Alok K.
  • Jenkins-Smith, Hank C.
  • Silva, Carol L.
  • Weimer, David L.

Abstract

In contrast to providing standard reminders about remembering household budgets, does asking survey respondents about their discretionary income and its use affect their voting responses in a national advisory referendum survey? We explore this question using U.S. household data from a unique set of multi-mode random samples (telephone and Internet surveys), and an advisory referendum concerning the Kyoto Protocol. The contingent valuation method is applied to estimate household willingness to pay (WTP) for a split-sample treatment: respondents who only received a standard reminder of household budgets (control group) versus respondents who received two mental accounting-type questions on discretionary income and its uses (treatment group). Results indicate that the treatment significantly influences voting responses and lowers estimated household WTP.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Hui & Berrens, Robert P. & Bohara, Alok K. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L. & Weimer, David L., 2005. "Testing for Budget Constraint Effects in a National Advisory Referendum Survey on the Kyoto Protocol," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(2), pages 1-17, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:jlaare:31215
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.31215
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/31215/files/30020350.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Berrens, Robert P. & Bohara, Alok K. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L. & Weimer, David L., 2004. "Information and effort in contingent valuation surveys: application to global climate change using national internet samples," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 331-363, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Henrik Lindhjem & Ståle Navrud, 2009. "Asking for Individual or Household Willingness to Pay for Environmental Goods?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(1), pages 11-29, May.
    2. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
    3. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2008. "Asking for Individual or Household Willingness to Pay for Environmental Goods? Implication for aggregate welfare measures," MPRA Paper 11469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Onno J. Kuik & Barbara Bucher & Michela Catenacci & Etem Karakaya & Richard S.J. Tol, 2006. "Methodological aspects of recent climate change damage cost studies," Working Papers FNU-122, Research unit Sustainability and Global Change, Hamburg University, revised Dec 2006.
    5. Alberini, Anna & Ščasný, Milan & Bigano, Andrea, 2018. "Policy- v. individual heterogeneity in the benefits of climate change mitigation: Evidence from a stated-preference survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 565-575.
    6. Hui Li & Robert P. Berrens & Alok K. Bohara & Hank C. Jenkins-Smith & Carol L. Silva & David L. Weimer, 2005. "Exploring the Beta Model Using Proportional Budget Information in a Contingent Valuation Study," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 17(8), pages 1-9.
    7. Anna Alberini & Andrea Bigano & Milan Šcasný & Iva Zverinová, 2016. "Preferences for Energy Efficiency vs. Renewables: How Much Does a Ton of CO2 Emissions Cost?," Working Papers 2016.64, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    8. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2010. "Can cheap panel-based internet surveys substitute costly in-person interviews in CV surveys?," MPRA Paper 24069, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Alberini, Anna & Bigano, Andrea & Ščasný, Milan & Zvěřinová, Iva, 2018. "Preferences for Energy Efficiency vs. Renewables: What Is the Willingness to Pay to Reduce CO2 Emissions?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 171-185.
    10. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2008. "Internet CV surveys – a cheap, fast way to get large samples of biased values?," MPRA Paper 11471, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Mozumder, Pallab & Vásquez, William F. & Marathe, Achla, 2011. "Consumers' preference for renewable energy in the southwest USA," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1119-1126.
    12. 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.
    13. Norbert Brunner & Vijay Mishra & Ponnusamy Sakthivel & Markus Starkl & Christof Tschohl, 2015. "The Human Right to Water in Law and Implementation," Laws, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 4(3), pages 1-59, August.
    14. Alberto Longo & David Hoyos & Anil Markandya, 2012. "Willingness to Pay for Ancillary Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 119-140, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:ags:jlaare:31215. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/waeaaea.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.