IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Endowment effect theory, prediction bias and publicly provided goods: an experimental study

  • Ivo Bischoff


Many studies report on a systematic disparity between the willingness to pay for a certain good (WTP) and the willingness to accept retribution payments in exchange for giving up this good (WTA). Thaler (1980) employs prospect theory to explain this disparity. The literature contains two different interpretations of his endowment effect theory. Accordingly, the disparity is caused either by the disutility from parting with one's endowment and/or by an extra utility from ownership which is not anticipated by individuals who are not endowed with the good. So far, the empirical evidence on the applicability of endowment effect theory is limited to private goods. The current paper reports on an experiment which finds a significant ownership utility effect for a publicly provided good. This result indicates that prospect theory applies to publicly provided goods even though consumers do not have exclusive property rights.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists in its journal Environmental and Resource Economics.

Volume (Year): 39 (2008)
Issue (Month): 3 (March)
Pages: 283-296

in new window

Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:39:y:2008:i:3:p:283-296
Contact details of provider: Web page:

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.:

as in new window
  1. John List, 2004. "Neoclassical theory versus prospect theory: Evidence from the marketplace," Framed Field Experiments 00174, The Field Experiments Website.
  2. Nunes, Paulo A. L. D. & Schokkaert, Erik, 2003. "Identifying the warm glow effect in contingent valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 231-245, March.
  3. Clark, Judy & Burgess, Jacquelin & Harrison, Carolyn M., 2000. ""I struggled with this money business": respondents' perspectives on contingent valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 45-62, April.
  4. 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.
  5. Brown, Thomas C., 2005. "Loss aversion without the endowment effect, and other explanations for the WTA-WTP disparity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 367-379, July.
  6. Gwendolyn Morrison, 1997. "Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: some evidence of an endowment effect," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 411-417.
  7. Biel, Anders & Johansson-Stenman, Olof & Nilsson, Andreas, 2006. "Emotions, Morality and Public Goods: The WTA-WTP Disparity Revisited," Working Papers in Economics 193, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  8. Franciosi, Robert & Kujal, Praveen & Michelitsch, Roland & Smith, Vernon & Deng, Gang, 1996. "Experimental tests of the endowment effect," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 213-226, August.
  9. Peter Frykblom & Glenn Harrison & Clay Lesley & Stephen Nape, 2002. "Hypothetical Bias and Willingness to Accept," Working Papers 02-14, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
  10. 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.
  11. R. Isaac & James Walker & Susan Thomas, 1984. "Divergent evidence on free riding: An experimental examination of possible explanations," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 113-149, January.
  12. Bischoff, Ivo, 2006. "Endowment effect theory, prediction bias and publicly provided goods – an experimental study," Finanzwissenschaftliche Arbeitspapiere 75, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Fachbereich Wirtschaftswissenschaften.
  13. West, Patricia M, 1996. " Predicting Preferences: An Examination of Agent Learning," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 68-80, June.
  14. Jack L. Knetsch, 1994. "Environmental Valuation: Some Problems of Wrong Questions and Misleading Answers," Environmental Values, White Horse Press, vol. 3(4), pages 351-368, November.
  15. Cooper, Philip & Poe, Gregory L. & Bateman, Ian J., 2004. "The structure of motivation for contingent values: a case study of lake water quality improvement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 69-82, September.
  16. Loewenstein, George & Adler, Daniel, 1995. "A Bias in the Prediction of Tastes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(431), pages 929-37, July.
  17. Van Boven, Leaf & Loewenstein, George & Dunning, David, 2003. "Mispredicting the endowment effect:: Underestimation of owners' selling prices by buyer's agents," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 351-365, July.
  18. 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 635-47, June.
  19. Frey, Bruno S & Eichenberger, Reiner, 1991. " Anomalies in Political Economy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 68(1-3), pages 71-89, January.
  20. Henrik Svedsäter, 2003. "Economic Valuation of the Environment: How Citizens Make Sense of Contingent Valuation Questions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(1), pages 122-135.
  21. Davis, Harry L & Hoch, Stephen J & Ragsdale, E K Easton, 1986. " An Anchoring and Adjustment Model of Spousal Predictions," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 25-37, June.
  22. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2004. "The nature of human altruism," Experimental 0402003, EconWPA.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:39:y:2008:i:3:p:283-296. 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: (Sonal Shukla)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.