IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/resene/v23y2001i4p373-388.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A general approach to the evaluation of nonmarket goods

Author

Listed:
  • Ebert, Udo

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Ebert, Udo, 2001. "A general approach to the evaluation of nonmarket goods," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 373-388, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:23:y:2001:i:4:p:373-388
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928-7655(01)00045-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Udo Ebert, 1998. "Evaluation of Nonmarket Goods: Recovering Unconditional Preferences," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(2), pages 241-254.
    2. Browning, M J, 1983. "Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Conditional Cost Functions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(3), pages 851-856, May.
    3. Cornes,Richard, 1992. "Duality and Modern Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521336017.
    4. Flores, Nicholas E. & Carson, Richard T., 1997. "The Relationship between the Income Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 287-295, July.
    5. Chavas, Jean-Paul, 1984. "The theory of mixed demand functions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 321-344, April.
    6. Donaldson, D. & Pendakur, K., 1999. "Equivalent-Income Functions and Income-Dependent Equivalence Scales," Discussion Papers dp99-8, Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University.
    7. Pollak, Robert A & Wales, Terence J, 1979. "Welfare Comparisons and Equivalence Scales," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(2), pages 216-221, May.
    8. Larson, Douglas M., 1991. "Recovering weakly complementary preferences," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 97-108, September.
    9. Ebert, Udo, 1997. "Selecting Preferences for Nonmarket Goods: Possibilities and Limitations," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 52(3-4), pages 301-317.
    10. Blundell,R. W. & Preston,Ian & Walker,Ian (ed.), 1994. "The Measurement of Household Welfare," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521451956.
    11. Larson, Douglas M., 1992. "Further results on willingness to pay for nonmarket goods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 101-122, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Lewbel, Arthur, 1989. "Household equivalence scales and welfare comparisons," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 377-391, August.
    14. Bradford, David F. & Hildebrandt, Gregory G., 1977. "Observable preferences for public goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 111-131, October.
    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. David G. Brown, 2009. "A Revealed Preference Feasibility Condition for Weak Complementarity," Departmental Working Papers 2009-08, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    2. Ebert, Udo, 2007. "Revealed preference and household production," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 276-289, March.
    3. David G. Brown, 2008. "A Preference-Theoretic Methodology for Nonmarket Goods," Departmental Working Papers 2008-07, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    4. David G. Brown, 2008. "Falsifying the �Goodness� of Nonmarket Goods with Revealed Preference," Departmental Working Papers 2008-08, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    5. David G. Brown, 2008. "Preference-Theoretic Weak Complementarity: Getting More with Less," Departmental Working Papers 2008-09, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.

    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. Donaldson, David & Pendakur, Krishna, 2004. "Equivalent-expenditure functions and expenditure-dependent equivalence scales," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(1-2), pages 175-208, January.
    2. Udo Ebert, 2003. "Environmental Goods and the Distribution of Income," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(4), pages 435-459, August.
    3. Udo Ebert, 2010. "On the Measurement of Welfare for Market and Nonmarket Goods: A Numerical Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(1), pages 102-109.
    4. Ebert, Udo, 2007. "Revealed preference and household production," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 276-289, March.
    5. Palmquist, Raymond B., 2005. "Weak complementarity, path independence, and the intuition of the Willig condition," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 103-115, January.
    6. Pashardes, Panos, 1995. "Equivalence scales in a rank-3 demand system," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 143-158, September.
    7. Martin Browning & Pierre-André Chiappori & Arthur Lewbel, 2013. "Estimating Consumption Economies of Scale, Adult Equivalence Scales, and Household Bargaining Power," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 80(4), pages 1267-1303.
    8. Laura Blow, 2003. "Demographics in demand systems," IFS Working Papers W03/18, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    9. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    10. Cunha-e-Sa, Maria A. & Ducla-Soares, Maria M., 1999. "Specification Tests for Mixed Demand Systems with an Emphasis on Combining Contingent Valuation and Revealed Data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 215-233, September.
    11. Christos Koulovatianos & Carsten Schröder & Ulrich Schmidt, 2008. "Confronting the Robinson Crusoe paradigm with household-size heterogeneity," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000002324, David K. Levine.
    12. Koulovatianos, Christos & Schröder, Carsten & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2010. "Confronting the representative consumer with household-size heterogeneity," Kiel Working Papers 1663, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    13. Luis Ayala & Rosa Martínez & Jesús Ruiz Huerta, 2003. "Equivalence scales in tax and transfer policies," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 27(3), pages 593-614, September.
    14. Dr Justin van de Ven, 2004. "Estimating Equivalence Scales for Tax and Benefits Systems," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 229, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    15. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 2004. "What's the use? welfare estimates from revealed preference models when weak complementarity does not hold," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 55-70, January.
    16. Martini, Chiara & Tiezzi, Silvia, 2014. "Is the environment a luxury? An empirical investigation using revealed preferences and household production," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 147-167.
    17. Majumder, Amita & Chakrabarty, Manisha, 2003. "Relative cost of children: the case of rural Maharashtra, India," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 61-76, January.
    18. Udo Ebert, 2013. "The relationship between individual and household measures of WTP and WTA," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(2), pages 367-390, February.
    19. David G. Brown, 2008. "Preference-Theoretic Weak Complementarity: Getting More with Less," Departmental Working Papers 2008-09, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    20. Christos Koutsampelas & Panos Tsakloglou, 2013. "The distribution of full income in Greece," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 40(4), pages 311-330, March.

    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:eee:resene:v:23:y:2001:i:4:p:373-388. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505569 .

    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.