IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v46y2010i1p1-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Income Treatment Effects in Contingent Valuation: The Case of the Swedish Predator Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Broberg

    ()

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Broberg, 2010. "Income Treatment Effects in Contingent Valuation: The Case of the Swedish Predator Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(1), pages 1-17, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:46:y:2010:i:1:p:1-17
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-009-9330-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10640-009-9330-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Alberini, Anna & Boyle, Kevin & Welsh, Michael, 2003. "Analysis of contingent valuation data with multiple bids and response options allowing respondents to express uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 40-62, January.
    2. Richard Carson & Robert Mitchell & Michael Hanemann & Raymond Kopp & Stanley Presser & Paul Ruud, 2003. "Contingent Valuation and Lost Passive Use: Damages from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(3), pages 257-286, July.
    3. Ready, Richard C. & Malzubris, J nis & Senkane, Silva, 2002. "The relationship between environmental values and income in a transition economy: surface water quality in Latvia," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(01), pages 147-156, February.
    4. Trudy Ann Cameron & Michelle D. James, 1986. "Utilizing "Closed-Ended" Contingent Valuation Survey DAta for Preliminary Demand Assessments," UCLA Economics Working Papers 415, UCLA Department of Economics.
    5. 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.
    6. Horowitz, John K. & McConnell, K. E., 2003. "Willingness to accept, willingness to pay and the income effect," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(4), pages 537-545, August.
    7. Douglas Macmillan & Elizabeth Duff & David Elston, 2001. "Modelling the Non-market Environmental Costs and Benefits of Biodiversity Projects Using Contingent Valuation Data," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 18(4), pages 391-410, April.
    8. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    9. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    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. repec:kap:enreec:v:69:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10640-016-0068-5 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Dominique Ami & Frédéric Aprahamian & Olivier Chanel & Stéphane Luchini, 2011. "A Test of Cheap Talk in Different Hypothetical Contexts: The Case of Air Pollution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(1), pages 111-130, September.
    3. Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2013. "The effects of current income and expected change in future income on stated preferences for environmental improvements," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 206-219.
    4. De Valck, Jeremy & Vlaeminck, Pieter & Liekens, Inge & Aertsens, Joris & Chen, Wendy & Vranken, Liesbet, 2012. "The sources of preference heterogeneity for nature restoration scenarios," Working Papers 146522, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    5. Baumgärtner, Stefan & Drupp, Moritz A. & Meya, Jasper N. & Munz, Jan M. & Quaas, Martin F., 2016. "Income inequality and willingness to pay for public environmental goods," Economics Working Papers 2016-04, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    6. Moritz A. Drupp, 2018. "Limits to Substitution Between Ecosystem Services and Manufactured Goods and Implications for Social Discounting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(1), pages 135-158, January.
    7. Stefan Baumgärtner & Alexandra Klein & Denise Thiel & Klara Winkler, 2015. "Ramsey Discounting of Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(2), pages 273-296, June.
    8. Meya, Jasper N. & Drupp, Moritz A. & Hanley, Nick, 2017. "Income inequality and the international transfer of environmental values," Economics Working Papers 2017-03, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    9. repec:eee:jeeman:v:85:y:2017:i:c:p:35-61 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Contingent valuation; Income effect; Income-elasticity of WTP; Income measure; Household composition; Multiple bounded; C81; Q20; Q26; Q28;

    JEL classification:

    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • Q20 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - General
    • Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government 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:kap:enreec:v:46:y:2010:i:1:p:1-17. 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 (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.