IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Considering household size in Contingent Valuation studies

  • Ahlheim, Michael
  • Schneider, Friedrich

In many empirical Contingent Valuation studies one finds that household size, i. e. the number auf household members, is negatively correlated with stated household willingness to pay for the realization of environmental projects. This observation is rather puzzling because in larger households more people can benefit from an environmental improvement than in small households. Therefore, the overall benefit should be greater for larger households. A plausible explanation could be that household budgets are tighter for large families than for smaller families with the same overall family income. The fact that larger families can afford only smaller willingness to pay statements in Contingent Valuation surveys than smaller families with the same income and the same preferences might have consequences for the allocation of public funds whenever the realization of an environmental project is made dependent on the outcome of a Contingent Valuation study. In this paper we show how the use of household equivalence scales for the assessment of environmental projects with the Contingent Valuation Method can serve to reduce the discrimination of members of large families.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/70768/1/738006033.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID) in its series FZID Discussion Papers with number 68-2013.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:fziddp:682013
Contact details of provider: Postal: D-70593 Stuttgart
Phone: 0711-459-22476
Fax: 0711-459-23360
Web page: http://www.fzid.uni-hohenheim.de/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Charlier, Erwin, 2002. "Equivalence Scales in an Intertemporal Setting with an Application to the Former West Germany," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 48(1), pages 99-126, March.
  2. Hammitt, James K. & Liu, Jin-Tan & Liu, Jin-Long, 2001. "Contingent valuation of a Taiwanese wetland," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(02), pages 259-268, May.
  3. Alistair Munro & Ian J. Bateman, 2006. "Household versus individual valuation: what’s the difference?," Royal Holloway, University of London: Discussion Papers in Economics 06/02, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London, revised Feb 2006.
  4. Udo Ebert & Patrick Moyes, 2004. "Household Decisions and Equivalence Scales," IDEP Working Papers 0404, Institut d'economie publique (IDEP), Marseille, France.
  5. Catherine M. Chambers & Paul E. Chambers & John C. Whitehead, 1998. "Contingent Valuation of Quasi-Public Goods: Validity, Reliability, and Application To Valuing a Historic Site," Public Finance Review, , vol. 26(2), pages 137-154, March.
  6. Ian Bateman & Alistair Munro, 2005. "An Experiment on Risky Choice Amongst Households," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(502), pages C176-C189, 03.
  7. Richard T. Carson, 2012. "Contingent Valuation: A Practical Alternative When Prices Aren't Available," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 27-42, Fall.
  8. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521296762 is not listed on IDEAS
  9. Joel Slemrod & Shlomo Yitzhaki, 2000. "Tax Avoidance, Evasion, and Administration," NBER Working Papers 7473, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
  11. Strand, Jon, 2003. "Public-good valuation and intrafamily allocation," Memorandum 28/2002, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
  12. Yuka Takeda, 2010. "Equivalence scales for measuring poverty in transitional Russia: Engel's food share method and the subjective economic well-being method," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 351-355.
  13. Johannes Schwarze, 2003. "Using Panel Data on Income Satisfaction to Estimate Equivalence Scale Elasticity," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 49(3), pages 359-372, 09.
  14. Muellbauer, John, 1980. "The Estimation of the Prais-Houthakker Model of Equivalence Scales," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(1), pages 153-76, January.
  15. Lewbel, Arthur, 1989. "Household equivalence scales and welfare comparisons," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 377-391, August.
  16. Olivier Chanel & Stéphane Luchini, 2007. "Modeling Starting Point Bias as Unobserved Heterogeneity in Contingent Valuation Surveys: An Application to Air Pollution," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(2), pages 533-547.
  17. Johannesson, Magnus & Johansson, Per-Olov & O'Conor, Richard M, 1996. "The Value of Private Safety versus the Value of Public Safety," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 263-75, November.
  18. Melenberg, B. & van Soest, A.H.O., 1995. "Semiparametric estimation of equivalence scales using subjective information," Discussion Paper 1995-71, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  19. Nesha Beharry-Borg & David Hensher & Riccardo Scarpa, 2009. "An Analytical Framework for Joint vs Separate Decisions by Couples in Choice Experiments: The Case of Coastal Water Quality in Tobago," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(1), pages 95-117, May.
  20. Browning, Martin, 1992. "Children and Household Economic Behavior," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 1434-75, September.
  21. Whittington, Dale & Smith, V. Kerry & Okorafor, Apia & Okore, Augustine & Liu, Jin Long & McPhail, Alexander, 1992. "Giving respondents time to think in contingent valuation studies: A developing country application," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 205-225, May.
  22. Carlsson, Fredrik & Johansson-Stenman, Olof & Martinsson, Peter, 2002. "Is Transport Safety More Valuable in the Air?," Working Papers in Economics 84, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  23. Aprahamian, Frederic & Chanel, Olivier & Luchini, Stephane, 2007. "AJAE Appendix: Modeling Starting Point Bias as Unobserved Heterogeneity in Contingent Valuation Surveys: An Application to Air Pollution," American Journal of Agricultural Economics Appendices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(2), May.
  24. Ahlheim, Michael & Fror, Oliver, 2003. "Valuing the non-market production of agriculture," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 52(8).
  25. Diamond, P., 1993. "Testing the Internal Consistency of Contingent Valuation Surveys," Working papers 93-1, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  26. Henrik Lindhjem & Ståle Navrud, 2009. "Asking for Individual or Household Willingness to Pay for Environmental Goods?," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(1), pages 11-29, May.
  27. John B. Loomis, 2000. "Vertically Summing Public Good Demand Curves: An Empirical Comparison of Economic versus Political Jurisdictions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(2), pages 312-321.
  28. Ahlheim, Michael, 1998. "Contingent valuation and the budget constraint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 205-211, November.
  29. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
  30. Fisher, Franklin M, 1987. "Household Equivalence Scales and Interpersonal Comparisons," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(3), pages 519-24, July.
  31. Alistair Munro, 2009. "Introduction to the Special Issue: Things We Do and Don’t Understand About the Household and the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(1), pages 1-10, May.
  32. Michael Ahlheim & Ulrike Lehr, 2008. "Equity and Aggregation in Environmental Valuation," Diskussionspapiere aus dem Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre der Universität Hohenheim 295/2008, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Germany.
  33. Muellbauer, John, 1977. "Testing the Barten Model of Household Composition Effects and the Cost of Children," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 87(347), pages 460-87, September.
  34. Fabrizio Balli & Silvia Tiezzi, 2010. "Erratum to: Equivalence scales, the cost of children and household consumption patterns in Italy," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 551-552, December.
  35. Pollak, Robert A & Wales, Terence J, 1979. "Welfare Comparisons and Equivalence Scales," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(2), pages 216-21, May.
  36. Biewen, Martin, 2000. "Income Inequality in Germany during the 1980s and 1990s," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 46(1), pages 1-19, March.
  37. Fabrizio Balli & Silvia Tiezzi, 2010. "Equivalence scales, the cost of children and household consumption patterns in Italy," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 527-549, December.
  38. Jerry Hausman, 2012. "Contingent Valuation: From Dubious to Hopeless," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 43-56, Fall.
  39. Muellbauer, John, 1974. "Household composition, Engel curves and welfare comparisons between households : A duality approach," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 103-122, August.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:fziddp:682013. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.