IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/jrp/jrpwrp/2009-057.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do EPA administrators recommend environmental policies that citizens want?

Author

Listed:
  • Fredrik Carlsson

    () (Department of Economics, University of Gothenburg)

  • Mitesh Kataria

    () (Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group, Jena)

  • Elina Lampi

    () (Department of Economics, University of Gothenburg)

Abstract

We investigate whether Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator recommendations regarding improvements in environmental quality differ from citizen preferences. The scope and significance of the possible difference are assessed by conducting identical choice experiments on a random sample of Swedish citizens and a random sample of administrators working at the Swedish EPA. The experiment concerns two environmental quality objectives: a Balanced Marine Environment and Clean Air. The EPA administrators were asked to choose the alternatives they would recommend as a policy, while the citizens were asked to act as private persons. We find that the rankings of attributes differ between the two groups and that the willingness to pay (WTP) obtained from the choices made by the administrators is higher for five out of the seven attributes, and in some cases the difference between the WTPs is not only significant but also substantial. We also asked the administrators to motivate their choices in the experiment, and the main motive was ecological sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Elina Lampi, 2009. "Do EPA administrators recommend environmental policies that citizens want?," Jena Economic Research Papers 2009-057, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
  • Handle: RePEc:jrp:jrpwrp:2009-057
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://zs.thulb.uni-jena.de/receive/jportal_jparticle_00153630
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hanna Ågren & Matz Dahlberg & Eva Mörk, 2007. "Do politicians’ preferences correspond to those of the voters? An investigation of political representation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 137-162, January.
    2. Wendy Kenyon & Nick Hanley & Ceara Nevin, 2001. "Citizens' Juries: An Aid to Environmental Valuation?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 19(4), pages 557-566, August.
    3. McConnell, K. E., 1997. "Does Altruism Undermine Existence Value?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 22-37, January.
    4. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    5. Bromley, Daniel W., 1990. "The ideology of efficiency: Searching for a theory of policy analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 86-107, July.
    6. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Elina Lampi, 2010. "Dealing with Ignored Attributes in Choice Experiments on Valuation of Sweden’s Environmental Quality Objectives," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 65-89, September.
    7. Flores, Nicholas E., 2002. "Non-paternalistic altruism and welfare economics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 293-305, February.
    8. Anna Alberini & Alberto Longo & Patrizia Riganti, 2006. "Using Surveys to Compare the Public’s and Decisionmakers’ Preferences for Urban Regeneration: The Venice Arsenale," Working Papers 2006.137, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    9. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    10. List John A. & Sinha Paramita & Taylor Michael H., 2006. "Using Choice Experiments to Value Non-Market Goods and Services: Evidence from Field Experiments," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-39, January.
    11. John A. List, 2001. "Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auctions for Sportscards," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1498-1507, December.
    12. Mueller,Dennis C., 2003. "Public Choice III," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521894753.
    13. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    14. Nyborg, Karine, 2000. "Homo Economicus and Homo Politicus: interpretation and aggregation of environmental values," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 305-322, July.
    15. Norman Gemmell & Oliver Morrissey & Abuzer Pinar, 2004. "Tax perceptions and preferences over tax structure in the united kingdom," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(493), pages 117-138, February.
    16. Ted O'Donoghue & Matthew Rabin, 2003. "Studying Optimal Paternalism, Illustrated by a Model of Sin Taxes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 186-191, May.
    17. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-719, November.
    18. Hammar, Henrik & Jagers, Sverker C. & Nordblom, Katarina, 2006. "What explains attitudes towards tax levels? A multi-tax comparison," Working Papers in Economics 225, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    19. Colombo, S. & Angus, A. & Morris, J. & Parsons, D.J. & Brawn, M. & Stacey, K. & Hanley, N., 2009. "A comparison of citizen and "expert" preferences using an attribute-based approach to choice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2834-2841, September.
    20. Gregory L. Poe & Eric K. Severance-Lossin & Michael P. Welsh, 1994. "Measuring the Difference (X — Y) of Simulated Distributions: A Convolutions Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(4), pages 904-915.
    21. Henrik Hammar & Sverker C. Jagers & Katarina Nordblom, 2008. "Attitudes towards Tax Levels: A Multi-Tax Comparison," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 29(4), pages 523-543, December.
    22. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Martinsson, 2003. "Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(4), pages 281-294.
    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. Andersson, Henrik & Hole, Arne Risa & Svensson, Mikael, 2016. "Valuation of small and multiple health risks: A critical analysis of SP data applied to food and water safety," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 41-53.
    2. Eggert, Håkan & Kataria, Mitesh & Lampi, Elina, 2016. "Do you trust me? – Go Fish! A Study on Trust and Fisheries Management," Working Papers in Economics 675, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    3. Nordén, Anna & Coria, Jessica & Jönsson, Anna Maria & Lagergren, Fredrik & Lehsten, Veiko, 2017. "Divergence in stakeholders' preferences: Evidence from a choice experiment on forest landscapes preferences in Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 179-195.
    4. Smith, V. Kerry & Mansfield, Carol & Allen Klaiber, H., 2013. "Terrorist threats, information disclosures, and consumer sovereignty," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 225-234.
    5. Fredrik Carlsson & Dinky Daruvala & Henrik Jaldell, 2012. "Do administrators have the same priorities for risk reductions as the general public?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 79-95, August.
    6. Michela Faccioli & Nicholas Hanley & Catalina M. Torres Figuerola & Antoni Riera Font, 2015. "Do we care about sustainability? An analysis of time sensitivity of social preferences under environmental time-persistent effects," DEA Working Papers 71, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Departament d'Economía Aplicada.
    7. Abbie Rogers & Jonelle Cleland, 2010. "Comparing Scientist and Public Preferences for Conserving Environmental Systems: A Case of the Kimberley's Tropical Waterways and Wetlands," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1080, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    8. Rachel Croson & Nicolas Treich, 2014. "Behavioral Environmental Economics: Promises and Challenges," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(3), pages 335-351, July.
    9. Rogers, Abbie A., 2011. "Is Choice Modelling Really Necessary? Public versus expert values for marine reserves in Western Australia," 2011 Conference (55th), February 8-11, 2011, Melbourne, Australia 100704, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    10. Vigren , Andreas & Ljungberg , Anders, 2017. "Public transport authorities’ use of cost-benefit analysis in practice," Working papers in Transport Economics 2017:8, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    11. Jussila Hammes, Johanna & Pyddoke, Roger & Nerhagen, Lena, 2013. "The impact of education on environmental policy decision-making," Working papers in Transport Economics 2013:9, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    12. repec:eee:ecolec:v:147:y:2018:i:c:p:253-263 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Eggert, Håkan & Kataria, Mitesh & Lampi, Elina, 2016. "Difference in Preferences or in Preference Orderings? Comparing Choices of Environmental Bureaucrats, Recreational Anglers, and the Public," Working Papers in Economics 669, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    14. Jussila Hammes, Johanna, 2013. "Civil servants’ education and the representativeness of the bureaucracy in environmental policy-making," Working papers in Transport Economics 2013:30, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    15. Colombo, S. & Angus, A. & Morris, J. & Parsons, D.J. & Brawn, M. & Stacey, K. & Hanley, N., 2009. "A comparison of citizen and "expert" preferences using an attribute-based approach to choice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2834-2841, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Choice experiment; environmental policy; administrators; citizens; environmental objectives.;

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    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:jrp:jrpwrp:2009-057. 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: (Markus Pasche). General contact details of provider: http://www.jenecon.de .

    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.