Bridging the Gap between the Field and the Lab: Environmental Goods, Policy Maker Input, and Consequentiality

Authors

Christian A. Vossler, University of Tennessee
Mary F. Evans, Claremont McKenna CollegeFollow

Document Type

Article - preprint

Department

Economics (CMC)

Publication Date

2009

Abstract

This paper explores the criterion validity of stated preference methods through experimental referenda that capture key characteristics of a stated preference survey for a proposed environmental program. In particular, we investigate whether advisory referenda, where participant votes have either known or unknown weight in the policy decision, can elicit values comparable to that of a standard, incentive-compatible referendum. When participants regard their votes as consequential, our results suggest there is no elicitation bias with advisory referenda. For advisory referenda where participants view their votes as inconsequential, and for purely hypothetical referenda, we observe elicitation bias.

Rights Information

© 2009 Elsevier

Terms of Use & License Information

Terms of Use for work posted in Scholarship@Claremont.

DOI

http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2009.04.007

Recommended Citation

Vossler, Christian A. and Mary F. Evans, Bridging the Gap between the Field and the Lab: Environmental Goods, Policy Maker Input, and Consequentiality, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 58: 338-345, 2009.