IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/feb/framed/00173.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using random nth price auctions to value non-market goods and services

Author

Listed:
  • John List

Abstract

Public policy decision making often requires balancing the benefits of a policy with the costs. While regulators in the United States and abroad rely heavily on benefit-cost analysis, critics contend that hypothetical bias precludes one of the most popular benefit estimation techniques--contingent surveys--from providing reliable economic values for nonmarket goods and services. This paper explores a new methodology to obtain the total value of nonmarket goods and services--random nth price auctions. The empirical work revolves around examining behavior of 360 participants in a competitive marketplace, where subjects naturally buy, sell, and trade commodities. The field experiment provides some preliminary evidence that hypothetical random nth price auctions can, in certain situations, reveal demand truthfully.

Suggested Citation

  • John List, 2003. "Using random nth price auctions to value non-market goods and services," Framed Field Experiments 00173, The Field Experiments Website.
  • Handle: RePEc:feb:framed:00173
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://s3.amazonaws.com/fieldexperiments-papers2/papers/00173.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dragicevic, Arnaud Z. & Ettinger, David, 2011. "Private Valuation of a Public Good in Three Auction Mechanisms," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(02), pages 1-29, April.
    2. Poole, Nigel D. & Marti'nez, Laura Marti'nez-Carrasco & Gimenez, Fernando Vidal, 2007. "Quality perceptions under evolving information conditions: Implications for diet, health and consumer satisfaction," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 175-188, April.
    3. Lee, Ji Yong & Han, Doo Bong & Nayga Jr, Rodolfo M. & Lim, Song-Soo, 2011. "Valuing traceability of imported beef in Korea: an experimental auction approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 0(Issue 3), pages 1-14, September.
    4. John A. List, 2014. "Using Field Experiments to Change the Template of How We Teach Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(2), pages 81-89, June.
    5. Martinez-Carrasco, Laura & Brugarolas, Margarita & Martinez-Poveda, Africa & Ros, María del Mar & Ruíz Martínez, Juan José, 2014. "Factores determinantes del precio de los tomates de variedades tradicionales: un análisis de precios hedónicos," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 0(Number 02), pages 1-15, December.
    6. Ty Feldkamp & Ted C. Schroeder, 2004. "Experimental Auction Procedure: Impact on Valuation of Quality Differentiated Goods," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 389-405.
    7. Magdalena Brzozowicz & Michał Krawczyk & Przemysław Kusztelak, 2017. "Do anchors hold for real? Anchoring effect and hypothetical bias in declared WTP," Working Papers 2017-24, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    8. Bruner, David M. & Huth, William L. & McEvoy, David M. & Morgan, O. Ashton, 2014. "Consumer Valuation of Food Safety: The Case of Postharvest Processed Oysters," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 0(Number 2), pages 1-19, August.
    9. Levitt, Steven D. & List, John A., 2009. "Field experiments in economics: The past, the present, and the future," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 1-18, January.
    10. Veronika Andorfer & Ulf Liebe, 2012. "Research on Fair Trade Consumption—A Review," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 106(4), pages 415-435, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Hellyer, Nicole Elizabeth & Fraser, Iain & Haddock-Fraser, Janet, 2010. "Food Choice, Nutritional Information And Functional Ingredients: An Experimental Auction Employing Bread," 115th Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, September 15-17, 2010, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany 116424, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Han, Doo Bong & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. & Lee, Ji Yong & Yoon, Jong Min, 2012. "Assessing Korean Consumers’ Valuation for Domestic and Imported Rice: Importance of Country of Origin and Food Miles Information," 2012 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2012, Birmingham, Alabama 119817, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    14. Laurent Muller & Bernard Ruffieux, 2011. "Do price-tags influence consumers’ willingness to pay? On the external validity of using auctions for measuring value," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(2), pages 181-202, May.
    15. repec:oup:revage:v:26:y:2004:i:2:p:170-185. is not listed on IDEAS
    16. repec:dau:papers:123456789/6445 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Wendy J. Umberger & Dillon M. Feuz, 2004. "The Usefulness of Experimental Auctions in Determining Consumers' Willingness-to-Pay for Quality-Differentiated Products," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 170-185.
    18. repec:eee:resene:v:49:y:2017:i:c:p:48-61 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Jeffrey Flory & Uri Gneezy & Kenneth Leonard & John List, 2012. "Sex, competitiveness, and investment in offspring: On the origin of preferences," Artefactual Field Experiments 00072, The Field Experiments Website.
    20. Kean Siang Ch’Ng & Suet Leng Khoo, 2015. "Market Mechanisms To Allocate Heritage Conservation Fund: An Experimental Study," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 60(05), pages 1-19, December.
    21. Carlberg, Jared G. & Froehlich, Eve J., 2011. "Effects of Elicitation Method on Willingness-to-Pay: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 0(Number 2), pages 1-10, July.

    More about this item

    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:feb:framed:00173. 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: (Joe Seidel). General contact details of provider: http://www.fieldexperiments.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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.