IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genres/1905.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What's the Use? Welfare Estimates from Revealed Preference Models when Weak Complementarity Does Not Hold

Author

Listed:
  • Herriges, Joseph A.
  • Kling, Catherine L.
  • Phaneuf, Daniel J.

Abstract

In this paper we consider the theoretical and empirical ramifications of welfare measurement in revealed preference models when weak complementarity does not hold. In the context of a Kuhn-Tucker model of recreation demand we show that, while it is possible to estimate preferences that do not appear to exhibit weak complementarity, the calculation of welfare measurements from these models requires a cardinal interpretation of preferences that cannot be tested. Furthermore, we reiterate the under-appreciated fact that even traditional use value estimates require a cardinal restriction on preferences that, while often intuitive, also cannot be tested. We demonstrate empirically that the choice of restrictions can have significant ramifications, as use value estimates can vary widely based on the assumed preference structure.

Suggested Citation

  • 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," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1905, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:isu:genres:1905
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/papers/paper_1905.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel J. Phaneuf & Catherine L. Kling & Joseph A. Herriges, 2000. "Estimation and Welfare Calculations in a Generalized Corner Solution Model with an Application to Recreation Demand," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(1), pages 83-92, February.
    2. Wales, T. J. & Woodland, A. D., 1983. "Estimation of consumer demand systems with binding non-negativity constraints," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 263-285, April.
    3. Bockstael, Nancy E & McConnell, Kenneth E, 1983. "Welfare Measurement in the Household Production Framework," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 806-814, September.
    4. Udo Ebert, 1998. "Evaluation of Nonmarket Goods: Recovering Unconditional Preferences," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(2), pages 241-254.
    5. Flores, Nicholas E., 1996. "Reconsidering the Use of Hicks Neutrality to Recover Total Value," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 49-64, July.
    6. W. Douglas Shaw & J. Scott Shonkwiler, 2000. "Brand Choice and Purchase Frequency Revisited: An Application to Recreation Behavior," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(3), pages 515-526.
    7. Flores, Nicholas E., 2002. "Non-paternalistic altruism and welfare economics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 293-305, February.
    8. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L., 2003. "Recreation Demand Models," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10211, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    9. Jeffrey T. LaFrance & W. Michael Hanemann, 1989. "The Dual Structure of Incomplete Demand Systems," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 71(2), pages 262-274.
    10. Ronald Cummings & Glenn Harrison, 1995. "The measurement and decomposition of nonuse values: A critical review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(3), pages 225-247, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Larson, Douglas M., 1991. "Recovering weakly complementary preferences," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 97-108, September.
    13. Alan Randall, 1994. "Difficulty with the Travel Cost Method," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(1), pages 88-96.
    14. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    15. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    16. 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.
    17. Neill, Jon R., 1988. "Another theorem on using market demands to determine willingness to pay for non-traded goods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 224-232, June.
    18. Larson, Douglas M., 1992. "Further results on willingness to pay for nonmarket goods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 101-122, September.
    19. Herriges, Joseph A. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 1999. "Choice Set Definition Issues in a Kuhn-Tucker Model of Recreation Demand," Staff General Research Papers Archive 5222, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    20. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 1999. "Corner Solution Models of Recreation Demand: A Comparison of Competing Frameworks," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1513, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    21. Hausman, Jerry A, 1981. "Exact Consumer's Surplus and Deadweight Loss," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(4), pages 662-676, September.
    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. repec:clg:wpaper:2010-05 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. David G. Brown, 2008. "Falsifying the “Goodness” of Nonmarket Goods with Revealed Preference," Departmental Working Papers 2008-08, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    3. Ebert, Udo, 2007. "Revealed preference and household production," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 276-289, March.
    4. Cloé Garnache & Scott M. Swinton & Joseph A. Herriges & Frank Lupi & R. Jan Stevenson, 2016. "Solving the Phosphorus Pollution Puzzle: Synthesis and Directions for Future Research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1334-1359.
    5. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Kuriyama, Koichi & Michael Hanemann, W. & Hilger, James R., 2010. "A latent segmentation approach to a Kuhn-Tucker model: An application to recreation demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 209-220, November.
    7. Tatsuo Suwa, 2008. "Estimation of the spatial substitution effect of national park trip demand: an application of the Kuhn-Tucker model," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 9(4), pages 239-257, December.
    8. Castro, Marisol & Bhat, Chandra R. & Pendyala, Ram M. & Jara-Díaz, Sergio R., 2012. "Accommodating multiple constraints in the multiple discrete–continuous extreme value (MDCEV) choice model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 729-743.
    9. Eom, Young-Sook & Larson, Douglas M., 2006. "Improving environmental valuation estimates through consistent use of revealed and stated preference information," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 501-516, July.
    10. 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.
    11. Jared C. Carbone & V. Kerry Smith, 2010. "Valuing ecosystem services in general equilibrium," NBER Working Papers 15844, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Bhattacharjee, Subhra & Kling, Catherine L. & Herriges, Joseph A., 2009. "Kuhn-Tucker Estimation of Recreation Demand – A Study of Temporal Stability," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49408, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Ian Bateman & Georgina Mace & Carlo Fezzi & Giles Atkinson & Kerry Turner, 2011. "Economic Analysis for Ecosystem Service Assessments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 177-218, February.
    14. von Haefen, Roger H., 2007. "Empirical strategies for incorporating weak complementarity into consumer demand models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 15-31, July.
    15. Bhat, Chandra R., 2008. "The multiple discrete-continuous extreme value (MDCEV) model: Role of utility function parameters, identification considerations, and model extensions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 274-303, March.

    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:1905. 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: (Curtis Balmer). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.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.