IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genres/1596.html

Importance of Functional Form in the Estimation of Welfare (The)

Author

Listed:
  • Kling, Catherine L.

Abstract

Researchers have recognized the central role that the choice of functional form has on estimates of consumer surplus. The purpose of this paper is to quantify the magnitude of errors which might arise from the use of incorrect functional forms. It describes a simulation experiment where estimated consumer surplus, based on simulated data sets, is compared with consumer surplus computed directly from the simulated data. The errors resulting from the use of mismatching functional forms range from approximately 4 percent to 107 percent.

Suggested Citation

  • Kling, Catherine L., 1989. "Importance of Functional Form in the Estimation of Welfare (The)," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1596, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:isu:genres:1596
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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. repec:sss:wpaper:201407 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. John Crooker & Joseph Herriges, 2004. "Parametric and Semi-Nonparametric Estimation of Willingness-to-Pay in the Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Framework," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(4), pages 451-480, April.
    3. Cati Torres & Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley, 2014. "Incorrectly accounting for preference heterogeneity in choice experiments: what are the implications for welfare measurement?," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2014-07, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    4. Chotikapanich, Duangkamon & Griffiths, William E., 1998. "Carnarvon Gorge: a comment on the sensitivity of consumer surplus estimation," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 42(3), pages 1-13.
    5. Crooker, John & Kling, Catherine L., 2000. "Nonparametric Bounds on Welfare Measures: A New Tool for Nonmarket Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 145-161, March.
    6. Chan, Nathan & Wichman, Casey, 2018. "Valuing Nonmarket Impacts of Climate Change: From Reduced Form to Welfare," RFF Working Paper Series 18-06, Resources for the Future.
    7. Catalina M. Torres Figuerola & Nick Hanley & Sergio Colombo, 2011. "Incorrectly accounting for taste heterogeneity in choice experiments: Does it really matter for welfare measurement?," CRE Working Papers (Documents de treball del CRE) 2011/1, Centre de Recerca Econòmica (UIB ·"Sa Nostra").
    8. 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.
    9. Pattiz, Brian David, 2009. "Count regression models for recreation demand: an application to Clear Lake," ISU General Staff Papers 200901010800002092, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    10. Silvia Ferrini & Carlo Fezzi, 2012. "Generalized Additive Models for Nonmarket Valuation via Revealed or Stated Preference Methods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 782-802.
    11. Crooker, John R., 2007. "Nonparametric Bounds on Welfare with Measurement Error in Prices: Techniques for Non-Market Resource Valuation," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 239-252, October.
    12. repec:isu:genstf:1997010108000013022 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Søren B. Olsen & Cathrine U. Jensen & Toke E. Panduro, 2020. "Modelling Strategies for Discontinuous Distance Decay in Willingness to Pay for Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(2), pages 351-386, February.
    14. 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").
    15. C. Woo & J. Zarnikau & E. Kollman, 2012. "Exact welfare measurement for double-log demand with partial adjustment," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 171-180, February.

    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:isu:genres:1596. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.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.