IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fae/wpaper/2014.16.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Interval Bidding in a Distribution Elicitation Format

Author

Listed:
  • Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu

    () (LEMNA, University of Nantes)

  • François-Charles Wolff

    () (LEMNA, University of Nantes and INED)

  • Jason Shogren

    () (Department of Economics and Finance, University of Wyoming)

Abstract

Interval bidding allows people to report a range of values for a non-market good. Herein we allow people to choose their distribution over this range endogenously. Using elephant protection as our motivating example, our results suggest the shape of the distribution greatly varies across people and the degree of uncertainty is proportional to their willingness to pay. We also find that both the expected willingness to pay and the degree of uncertainty differ when the valuation exercise is real versus hypothetical.

Suggested Citation

  • Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & François-Charles Wolff & Jason Shogren, 2014. "Interval Bidding in a Distribution Elicitation Format," Working Papers 2014.16, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:fae:wpaper:2014.16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://faere.fr/pub/WorkingPapers/Mahieu_Wolff_Shogren_FAERE-WP2014-16.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2014
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jason F. Shogren & John A. List & Dermot J. Hayes, 2000. "Preference Learning in Consecutive Experimental Auctions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 1016-1021.
    2. Flachaire, Emmanuel & Hollard, Guillaume, 2007. "Starting point bias and respondent uncertainty in dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 183-194, September.
    3. Jacquemet, Nicolas & Joule, Robert-Vincent & Luchini, Stéphane & Shogren, Jason F., 2013. "Preference elicitation under oath," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 110-132.
    4. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    5. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    6. Carthy, Trevor & Chilton, Susan & Covey, Judith & Hopkins, Lorraine & Jones-Lee, Michael & Loomes, Graham & Pidgeon, Nick & Spencer, Anne, 1998. "On the Contingent Valuation of Safety and the Safety of Contingent Valuation: Part 2--The CV/SG "Chained" Approach," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 187-213, December.
    7. Nick Hanley & Bengt Kriström & Jason F. Shogren, 2009. "Coherent Arbitrariness: On Value Uncertainty for Environmental Goods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(1), pages 41-50.
    8. Henrik Svedsater, 2007. "Ambivalent statements in contingent valuation studies: inclusive response formats and giving respondents time to think," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(1), pages 91-107, March.
    9. repec:eee:ijrema:v:29:y:2012:i:2:p:148-166 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Banerjee, Prasenjit & Shogren, Jason F., 2014. "Bidding behavior given point and interval values in a second-price auction," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 126-137.
    11. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Hanley, Nick & LaRiviere, Jacob, 2013. "The Effects of Experience on Preference Uncertainty: Theory and Empirics for Public and Quasi-Public Environmental Goods," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-125, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    12. Rolando Guzman & Charles Kolstad, 2007. "Researching Preferences, Valuation and Hypothetical Bias," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(3), pages 465-487, July.
    13. Rowe, Robert D. & Schulze, William D. & Breffle, William S., 1996. "A Test for Payment Card Biases," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 178-185, September.
    14. Ready Richard C. & Whitehead John C. & Blomquist Glenn C., 1995. "Contingent Valuation When Respondents Are Ambivalent," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 181-196, September.
    15. Lewis, Jeffrey B. & Linzer, Drew A., 2005. "Estimating Regression Models in Which the Dependent Variable Is Based on Estimates," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(04), pages 345-364, September.
    16. Dubourg, W R & Jones-Lee, M W & Loomes, Graham, 1994. "Imprecise Preferences and the WTP-WTA Disparity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 115-133, October.
    17. Li Chuan-Zhong & Mattsson Leif, 1995. "Discrete Choice under Preference Uncertainty: An Improved Structural Model for Contingent Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 256-269, March.
    18. Janiszewski, Chris & Lichtenstein, Donald R, 1999. " A Range Theory Account of Price Perception," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 353-368, March.
    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. Olivier Chanel & Khaled Makhloufi & Mohammad Abu-Zaineh, 2017. "Can a Circular Payment Card Format Effectively Elicit Preferences? Evidence From a Survey on a Mandatory Health Insurance Scheme in Tunisia," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 385-398, June.
    2. Karl H. Schlag & Joël J. van der Weele, 2015. "A method to elicit beliefs as most likely intervals," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(5), pages 456-468, September.
    3. Voltaire, Louinord, 2017. "Pricing Future Nature Reserves Through Contingent Valuation Data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 66-75.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Contingent Valuation; Uncertainty; Distribution format.;

    JEL classification:

    • C5 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:fae:wpaper:2014.16. 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: (Mireille Chiroleu-Assouline). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/faereea.html .

    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.