IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sot/journl/y2012i50n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of experimental economics in transport and logistics

Author

Listed:
  • de Jong, Gerard

Abstract

There is scope for applying experimental economics in transport and logistics analysis. Experimental economics is a set of techniques for gathering (and analysing) data by inducing people (through specific rewards) to act as economic agents and observing the choices they then make in experimental situations. These experiments often involve interactions between the respondents, possibly in a market setting, and this can be applied in transport to study for instance shipper – carrier interaction. Various subfields of experimental economics that might be relevant for transport and logistics research are described. We also review past applications of experimental economics in transport and logistics and work out some ideas for future applications.

Suggested Citation

  • de Jong, Gerard, 2012. "Application of experimental economics in transport and logistics," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 50, pages 1-3.
    • Handle: RePEc:sot:journl:y:2012:i:50:n:3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.openstarts.units.it/dspace/bitstream/10077/6111/1/B_DE_JONG%20-%20ET2012.50.03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laurent Denant-Boèmont & Sabrina Hammiche, 2009. "Public transit capacity and Downs-Thomson paradox : an experiment," Post-Print halshs-00422064, HAL.
    2. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2001. "Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 179-192, March.
    3. Anders Lunander & Jan-Eric Nilsson, 2004. "Taking the Lab to the Field: Experimental Tests of Alternative Mechanisms to Procure Multiple Contracts," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 39-58, January.
    4. Anthony Ziegelmeyer & Frédéric Koessler & Kene Boun My & Laurent Denant-Boèmont, 2008. "Road Traffic Congestion and Public Information: An Experimental Investigation," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 42(1), pages 43-82, January.
    5. Charles R. Plott & Kathryn Zeiler, 2005. "The Willingness to Pay–Willingness to Accept Gap, the "Endowment Effect," Subject Misconceptions, and Experimental Procedures for Eliciting Valuations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(3), pages 530-545, June.
    6. Alessandro Innocenti & Patrizia Lattarulo & Maria Grazia Pazienza, 2009. "Heuristics and Biases in Travel Mode Choice," Labsi Experimental Economics Laboratory University of Siena 027, University of Siena.
    7. Selten, R. & Chmura, T. & Pitz, T. & Kube, S. & Schreckenberg, M., 2007. "Commuters route choice behaviour," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 394-406, February.
    8. Dellaert, B.G.C. & Prodigalidad, M. & Louviere, J.J., 1997. "Family members' projection of each other's preference and influence : a two-stage conjoint approach," Other publications TiSEM c5277e3b-fd03-47d3-84b0-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Gunnar Isacsson & Jan-Eric Nilsson, 2003. "An Experimental Comparison of Track Allocation Mechanisms in the Railway Industry," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 37(3), pages 353-381, September.
    10. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 1999. "Do Hypothetical and Actual Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments? - Application to the Valuation of the Environment," Working Papers in Economics 13, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    11. Don L. Coursey & John L. Hovis & William D. Schulze, 1987. "The Disparity Between Willingness to Accept and Willingness to Pay Measures of Value," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(3), pages 679-690.
    12. Ann Brewer & David Hensher, 2000. "Distributed work and travel behaviour: The dynamics of interactive agency choices between employers and employees," Transportation, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 117-148, February.
    13. George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
    14. Sterman, John D., 1989. "Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 301-335, June.
    15. David Hensher & Sean Puckett, 2005. "Refocusing the Modelling of Freight Distribution: Development of an Economic-Based Framework to Evaluate Supply Chain Behaviour in Response to Congestion Charging," Transportation, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 573-602, November.
    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. Chidambaram, Bhuvanachithra & Janssen, Marco A. & Rommel, Jens & Zikos, Dimitrios, 2014. "Commuters’ mode choice as a coordination problem: A framed field experiment on traffic policy in Hyderabad, India," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 9-22.

    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. Nicholas Janusch & Stephan Kroll & Christopher Goemans & Todd L. Cherry & Steffen Kallbekken, 2021. "Learning to accept welfare-enhancing policies: an experimental investigation of congestion pricing," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 59-86, March.
    2. Lindsay, Luke, 2019. "Adaptive loss aversion and market experience," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 43-61.
    3. Kyriaki Remoundou & Drichoutis Andreas & Phoebe Koundouri, 2010. "Warm glow in charitable auctions: Are the WEIRDos driving the results?," DEOS Working Papers 1028, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    4. Oben K Bayrak & Bengt Kriström, 2016. "Is there a valuation gap? The case of interval valuations," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 36(1), pages 218-236.
    5. Emmanuel Flachaire & Guillaume Hollard & Jason Shogren, 2013. "On the origin of the WTA–WTP divergence in public good valuation," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 431-437, March.
    6. Holden, Stein & Bezu, Sosina, 2014. "Tools, Fertilizer or Cash? Exchange Asymmetries in Productive Assets," CLTS Working Papers 13/14, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 11 Oct 2019.
    7. Clark, Jeremy & Friesen, Lana, 2008. "The causes of order effects in contingent valuation surveys: An experimental investigation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 195-206, September.
    8. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    9. Laurent Denant-Boèmont & Sabrina Hammiche, 2009. "Public Transit Capacity and Users' Choice: AnExperiment on Downs-Thomson Paradox," Post-Print halshs-00406223, HAL.
    10. Xiao Han & Yun Yu & Bin Jia & Zi‐You Gao & Rui Jiang & H. Michael Zhang, 2021. "Coordination Behavior in Mode Choice: Laboratory Study of Equilibrium Transformation and Selection," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(10), pages 3635-3656, October.
    11. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Frykblom & Carl-Johan Lagerkvist, 2004. "Consumer Benefits of Labels and Bans on GMO Foods: An Emprical Analysis Using Choice Experiments," Working Papers 04-02, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    12. Poh Har Neo & Seow Eng Ong & Yong Tu, 2008. "Buyer Exuberance and Price Premium," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 45(2), pages 331-345, February.
    13. Al-Ubaydli, Omar & Boettke, Peter, 2010. "Markets as economizers of information: Field experimental examination of the “Hayek Hypothesis”," MPRA Paper 27660, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Chidambaram, Bhuvanachithra & Janssen, Marco A. & Rommel, Jens & Zikos, Dimitrios, 2014. "Commuters’ mode choice as a coordination problem: A framed field experiment on traffic policy in Hyderabad, India," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 9-22.
    15. Andrea Isoni, 2011. "The willingness-to-accept/willingness-to-pay disparity in repeated markets: loss aversion or ‘bad-deal’ aversion?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 409-430, September.
    16. Farsi, Mehdi, 2010. "Risk aversion and willingness to pay for energy efficient systems in rental apartments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 3078-3088, June.
    17. Holden, Stein T. & Bezu, Sosina, 2019. "Exchange asymmetries in productive assets: Tools, fertilizer or cash?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 269-278.
    18. Isabel Marcin & Andreas Nicklisch, 2014. "Testing the Endowment Effect for Default Rules," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2014_01, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    19. Shosh Shahrabani & Uri Benzion & Tal Shavit, 2008. "WTP and WTA in competitive and non-competitive environments," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 3, pages 153-161, February.
    20. Christoph Merkle & Philipp Schreiber & Martin Weber, 2017. "Framing and retirement age: The gap between willingness-to-accept and willingness-to-pay," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 32(92), pages 757-809.

    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:sot:journl:y:2012:i:50:n:3. 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: Romeo Danielis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/xxxxxxx.html .

    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.