IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/wrarch/321712.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are Revealed Preference Measures of Quality Change Benefits Statistically Significant?

Author

Listed:
  • Larson, Douglas
  • Lew, Daniel
  • Loomis, John

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Larson, Douglas & Lew, Daniel & Loomis, John, 1999. "Are Revealed Preference Measures of Quality Change Benefits Statistically Significant?," Western Region Archives 321712, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:wrarch:321712
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.321712
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/321712/files/giannini-misc-844.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.321712?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kling, Catherine L., 1988. "Comparing welfare estimates of environmental quality changes from recreation demand models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 331-340, September.
    2. Catherine L. Kling & Richard J. Sexton, 1990. "Bootstrapping in Applied Welfare Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(2), pages 406-418.
    3. Kling, Catherine L., 1991. "Estimating the precision of welfare measures," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 244-259, November.
    4. Wiktor L. Adamowicz & Jerald J. Fletcher & Theodore Graham-Tomasi, 1989. "Functional Form and the Statistical Properties of Welfare Measures," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 71(2), pages 414-421.
    5. Porter-Hudak, Susan & Hayes, Kathy, 1986. "The statistical precision of a numerical methods estimator as applied to welfare loss," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 255-257.
    6. Vartia, Yrjo O, 1983. "Efficient Methods of Measuring Welfare Change and Compensated Income in Terms of Ordinary Demand Functions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(1), pages 79-98, January.
    7. Bockstael, N E & McConnell, K E, 1993. "Public Goods as Characteristics of Non-market Commodities," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(420), pages 1244-1257, September.
    8. Catherine L. Kling, 1992. "Some Results on the Variance of Welfare Estimates from Recreation Demand Models," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 318-328.
    9. Larson, Douglas M., 1991. "Recovering weakly complementary preferences," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 97-108, September.
    10. Kling, Catherine L., 1992. "Some Results on the Variance of Consumer Welfare Estimates from Recreation Demand Models," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1578, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    11. Nancy E. Bockstael & Catherine L. Kling, 1988. "Valuing Environmental Quality: Weak Complementarity with Sets of Goods," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(3), pages 654-662.
    12. Catherine L. Kling, 1988. "The Reliability of Estimates of Environmental Benefits from Recreation Demand Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(4), pages 892-901.
    13. Breslaw, Jon A & Smith, J Barry, 1995. "A Simple and Efficient Method for Estimating the Magnitude and Precision of Welfare Changes," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(3), pages 313-327, July-Sept.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. English, Donald B.K., 2000. "A Simple Procedure for Generating Confidence Intervals in Tourist Spending Profiles and Resulting Economic Impacts," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 30(1), pages 1-16.
    2. Torres, Cati & Hanley, Nick & Riera, Antoni, 2011. "How wrong can you be? Implications of incorrect utility function specification for welfare measurement in choice experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 111-121, July.
    3. Beatty, Timothy K.M. & Brozovic, Nicholas & Ward, Michael B., 2005. "Consumer Surplus Estimates and the Source of Regression Error," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19477, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Catalina M. Torres Figuerola & Nick Hanley & Antoni Riera Font, 2008. "The implications of incorrect utility function specification for welfare measurement in choice experiments," CRE Working Papers (Documents de treball del CRE) 2008/6, Centre de Recerca Econòmica (UIB ·"Sa Nostra").
    5. Bowker, James Michael & Starbuck, C. Meghan & English, Donald B.K. & Bergstrom, John C. & Rosenberger, Randall S. & McCollum, Daniel W., 2009. "Estimating the Net Economic Value of National Forest Recreation: An Application of the National Visitor Use Monitoring Database," Faculty Series 59603, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    6. 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.
    7. V. Smith & Mary Evans & H. Banzhaf & Christine Poulos, 2010. "Can Weak Substitution be Rehabilitated?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 203-221, February.
    8. Smith, V. Kerry, 2000. "JEEM and Non-market Valuation: 1974-1998," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 351-374, May.
    9. David G. Brown, 2009. "A Revealed Preference Feasibility Condition for Weak Complementarity," Departmental Working Papers 2009-08, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    10. Alain Carpentier & Dominique Vermersch, 1997. "Measuring willingness to pay for drinking water quality using the econometrics of equivalence scales [Mesure du consentement à payer pour une qualité d'eau potable au moyen de la méthode économétri," Post-Print hal-02841037, HAL.
    11. Neill, Jon R., 2022. "Using consumer’s surplus to bound willingness to pay for non-market goods," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    12. David S. Bullock & Philip Garcia & Kie‐Yup Shin, 2005. "Measuring producer welfare under output price uncertainty and risk non‐neutrality," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(1), pages 1-21, March.
    13. Zhen Sun & Yang Xie, 2013. "Error Analysis and Comparison of Two Algorithms Measuring Compensated Income," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 42(4), pages 433-452, December.
    14. Ebert, Udo, 2007. "Revealed preference and household production," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 276-289, March.
    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. Bockstael, Nancy E. & Freeman III, A. Myrick, 2006. "Welfare Theory and Valuation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 12, pages 517-570, Elsevier.
    17. Cooper, Joseph C., 1995. "The Application of Nonmarket Valuation Techniques to Agricultural Issues," Staff Reports 333359, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    18. Alston, Julian M. & Larson, Douglas M., 1992. "Precision vs Bias in Choosing Welfare Measures," Working Papers 232414, University of California, Davis, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    19. V. Smith & George Van Houtven, 2004. "Recovering Hicksian Consumer Surplus within a Collective Model: Hausman's Method for the Household," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 28(2), pages 153-167, June.
    20. Phaneuf, Daniel J. & Smith, V. Kerry, 2006. "Recreation Demand Models," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 671-761, Elsevier.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research Methods/ Statistical Methods;

    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:ags:wrarch:321712. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://extension.oregonstate.edu/weda/ .

    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.