IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jaerec/doi10.1086-697416.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Contingent Valuation Approach to Estimating Regulatory Costs: Mexico’s Day without Driving Program

Author

Listed:
  • Allen Blackman
  • Francisco Alpízar
  • Fredrik Carlsson
  • Marisol Rivera Planter

Abstract

Little is known about the cost of environmental regulations that target households instead of firms, partly because of significant methodological and data challenges. We use the contingent valuation method to measure the costs of Mexico City’s Day without Driving program, which seeks to stem pollution and traffic congestion by prohibiting vehicles from being driven one day each week. To our knowledge, ours is the first study to focus directly on using stated preference methods to isolate and estimate the private costs of an existing environmental regulation. We find that the Mexican program’s costs are substantial: up to US$130 per vehicle per year, which represents 1%–2% of drivers’ annual income and implies total costs of US$617 million per year. Recent research questions whether driving restrictions programs like Mexico City’s actually have environmental benefits. Our results suggest that whatever benefits these programs may have, they can be quite costly.

Suggested Citation

  • Allen Blackman & Francisco Alpízar & Fredrik Carlsson & Marisol Rivera Planter, 2018. "A Contingent Valuation Approach to Estimating Regulatory Costs: Mexico’s Day without Driving Program," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(3), pages 607-641.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jaerec:doi:10.1086/697416
    DOI: 10.1086/697416
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/697416
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/697416
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/697416?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lucas W. Davis, 2008. "The Effect of Driving Restrictions on Air Quality in Mexico City," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(1), pages 38-81, February.
    2. Maureen Cropper & Yi Jiang & Anna Alberini & Patrick Baur, 2014. "Getting Cars Off the Road: The Cost-Effectiveness of an Episodic Pollution Control Program," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(1), pages 117-143, January.
    3. Pizer, William A. & Kopp, Raymond, 2005. "Calculating the Costs of Environmental Regulation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 25, pages 1307-1351, Elsevier.
    4. Richard D. Morgenstern & William A. Pizer & Jhih-Shyang Shih, 2001. "The Cost Of Environmental Protection," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(4), pages 732-738, November.
    5. Eskeland, Gunnar S & Feyzioglu, Tarhan, 1997. "Rationing Can Backfire: The "Day without a Car" in Mexico City," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 11(3), pages 383-408, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Laura O. Taylor & Ronald G. Cummings, 1999. "Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 649-665, June.
    8. Krupnick, Alan & Alberini, Anna & Cropper, Maureen & Simon, Nathalie & O'Brien, Bernie & Goeree, Ron & Heintzelman, Martin, 2002. "Age, Health and the Willingness to Pay for Mortality Risk Reductions: A Contingent Valuation Survey of Ontario Residents," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 161-186, March.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Aadland, David & Caplan, Arthur J., 2006. "Cheap talk reconsidered: New evidence from CVM," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 562-578, August.
    12. Spulber, Daniel F., 1988. "Optimal environmental regulation under asymmetric information," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 163-181, March.
    13. Leung, Siu Fai & Yu, Shihti, 1996. "On the choice between sample selection and two-part models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1-2), pages 197-229.
    14. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    15. Paul E. Carrillo & Arun S. Malik & Yiseon Yoo, 2016. "Driving restrictions that work? Quito's Pico y Placa Program," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 49(4), pages 1536-1568, November.
    16. John D. McClelland & John K. Horowitz, 1999. "The Costs of Water Pollution Regulation in the Pulp and Paper Industry," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(2), pages 220-232.
    17. Richard Carson & Theodore Groves, 2007. "Incentive and informational properties of preference questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 181-210, May.
    18. R. K. Blamey & J. W. Bennett & M. D. Morrison, 1999. "Yea-Saying in Contingent Valuation Surveys," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(1), pages 126-141.
    19. Viard, V. Brian & Fu, Shihe, 2015. "The effect of Beijing's driving restrictions on pollution and economic activity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 98-115.
    20. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, 2002. "Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2427.
    21. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter & Akay, Alpaslan, 2011. "The effect of power outages and cheap talk on willingness to pay to reduce outages," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 790-798, September.
    22. James Hammitt, 2000. "Are The Costs of Proposed Environmental Regulations Overestimated? Evidence from the CFC Phaseout," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(3), pages 281-302, July.
    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. Shihe Fu & V. Brian Viard, 2022. "A mayors perspective on tackling air pollution," Chapters, in: Charles K.Y. Leung (ed.), Handbook of Real Estate and Macroeconomics, chapter 16, pages 413-437, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Ola Andersson & Pol Campos‐Mercade & Fredrik Carlsson & Florian H. Schneider & Erik Wengström, 2022. "The impact of stay‐at‐home policies on individual welfare," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 124(2), pages 340-362, April.
    3. Gang Cheng & Shuzhi Zhao & Di Huang, 2018. "Understanding the Effects of Improving Transportation on Pilgrim Travel Behavior: Evidence from the Lhasa, Tibet, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-13, October.
    4. Rivera, Nathaly M., 2021. "Air quality warnings and temporary driving bans: Evidence from air pollution, car trips, and mass-transit ridership in Santiago," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    5. Brent, Daniel & Beland, Louis-Philippe, 2020. "Traffic congestion, transportation policies, and the performance of first responders," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    6. Jie Ma & Lin Cheng & Dawei Li & Qiang Tu, 2018. "Stochastic Electric Vehicle Network Considering Environmental Costs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    7. Yanez-Pagans, Patricia & Martinez, Daniel & Mitnik, Oscar A. & Scholl, Lynn & Vazquez, Antonia, 2018. "Urban Transport Systems in Latin America and the Caribbean: Challenges and Lessons Learned," IZA Discussion Papers 11812, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Beaudoin, Justin & Chen, Yuan & Heres, David R. & Kheiravar, Khaled H. & Lade, Gabriel E. & Yi, Fujin & Zhang, Wei & Lin Lawell, C.-Y. Cynthia, 2018. "Environmental Policies in the Transportation Sector: Taxes, Subsidies, Mandates, Restrictions, and Investment," ISU General Staff Papers 201808150700001050, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    9. Salgado, Edgar & Mitnik, Oscar A., 2021. "Spatial and Time Spillovers of Driving Restrictions: Causal Evidence from Limas Pico y Placa Policy," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 11818, Inter-American Development Bank.
    10. Jorge A. Bonilla & Fernando Carriazo, 2018. "Assessing Social Experiments Using Apps: The Case of Car-Free Days in Bogotá," Documentos CEDE 16856, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    11. Blackman, Allen & Qin, Ping & Yang, Jun, 2020. "How costly are driving restrictions? Contingent valuation evidence from Beijing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).

    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. Blackman, Allen & Qin, Ping & Yang, Jun, 2020. "How costly are driving restrictions? Contingent valuation evidence from Beijing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    2. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    4. 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.
    5. Paul Mwebaze & Jeff Bennett & Nigel W. Beebe & Gregor J. Devine & Paul Barro, 2018. "Economic Valuation of the Threat Posed by the Establishment of the Asian Tiger Mosquito in Australia," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(2), pages 357-379, October.
    6. Reinhard Uehleke & Bodo Sturm, 2017. "The Influence of Collective Action on the Demand for Voluntary Climate Change Mitigation in Hypothetical and Real Situations," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(3), pages 429-454, July.
    7. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh & Krupnick, Alan & Lampi, Elina & Löfgren, Åsa & Qin, Ping & Sterner, Thomas, 2013. "The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth—A multiple country test of an oath script," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 105-121.
    8. 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.
    9. Carlsson, Fredrik & Daruvala, Dinky & Jaldell, Henrik, 2008. "Do you do what you say or do you do what you say others do?," Working Papers in Economics 309, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    10. Fifer, Simon & Rose, John M., 2016. "Can you ever be certain? Reducing hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments via respondent reported choice certaintyAuthor-Name: Beck, Matthew J," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 149-167.
    11. Penn, Jerrod & Hu, Wuyang & Ye, Tao, 2018. "Cheap Talk, Consequentiality, and Certainty Follow-up as Hypothetical Bias Mitigation Techniques: A Cross Country Comparison," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274018, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Aravena, Claudia & Hutchinson, W. George & Longo, Alberto, 2012. "Environmental pricing of externalities from different sources of electricity generation in Chile," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 1214-1225.
    13. Carrillo, Paul E. & Lopez-Luzuriaga, Andrea & Malik, Arun S., 2018. "Pollution or crime: The effect of driving restrictions on criminal activity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 50-69.
    14. Nicolas Jacquemet & Alexander James & Stéphane Luchini & Jason Shogren, 2011. "Social Psychology and Environmental Economics: A New Look at ex ante Corrections of Biased Preference Evaluation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(3), pages 413-433, March.
    15. Mark Morrison & Thomas Brown, 2009. "Testing the Effectiveness of Certainty Scales, Cheap Talk, and Dissonance-Minimization in Reducing Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(3), pages 307-326, November.
    16. Kees Vringer & Eline van der Heijden & Daan van Soest & Herman Vollebergh & Frank Dietz, 2017. "Sustainable Consumption Dilemmas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-21, June.
    17. Qin, Botao, 2020. "Does a promise script work to reduce the hypothetical bias? Evidence from an induced value experiment," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 14, pages 1-15.
    18. Svenningsen, Lea S. & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2018. "Testing the effect of changes in elicitation format, payment vehicle and bid range on the hypothetical bias for moral goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 17-32.
    19. Helga Fehr-Duda & Robin Schimmelpfennig, 2018. "Wider die Zahlengläubigkeit: Sind Befragungsergebnisse eine gute Grundlage für wirtschaftspolitische Entscheidungen?," ECON - Working Papers 297, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Dec 2018.
    20. Ladenburg, Jacob & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2014. "Augmenting short Cheap Talk scripts with a repeated Opt-Out Reminder in Choice Experiment surveys," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 39-63.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects
    • R48 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Government Pricing and Policy
    • O18 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Urban, Rural, Regional, and Transportation Analysis; Housing; Infrastructure

    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:ucp:jaerec:doi:10.1086/697416. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JAERE .

    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.