A case for measuring negative willingness to pay for consumer goods

被引:15
作者
Bass, Daniel A. [1 ]
McFadden, Brandon R. [1 ]
Messer, Kent D. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Delaware, Dept Appl Econ & Stat, 531 S Coll Ave,Rm 224, Newark, DE 19716 USA
基金
美国食品与农业研究所;
关键词
WTP; Willingness to accept; Negative willingness to pay; Market goods; CONTINGENT VALUATION; BOTTLED WATER; CULTURAL COGNITION; REFERENDUM MODELS; WELFARE ECONOMICS; PREFERENCES; VALUES; BEEF; WTP; PERCEPTIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102126
中图分类号
F3 [农业经济];
学科分类号
0202 ; 020205 ; 1203 ;
摘要
Negative willingness to pay (WTP) has received significant attention in the environmental economics literature but generally has been ignored by economists interested in measuring consumer preferences for food and beverages. Most consumer preference studies have focused solely on WTP measures and, in most cases, have treated negative consumer responses to a product as equivalent to consumers simply not wanting to purchase it since both sentiments have a WTP estimate of $0. However, for some goods such as bottled water, this approach can be an oversimplification that fails to reveal consumers' true sentiments, a problem that is relevant in policy contexts. To test this question, we conduct a randomized controlled study involving 1384 adult consumers that tests how three unconventional elicitation approaches affect estimates of consumer preferences for nearly identical goods: bottled water and tap water. We find that stated values for both types of water differ by treatment and that ignoring negative WTP values upwardly biases the premium consumers are willing to pay for bottled water. Our findings show that allowing negative values of WTP provides more-accurate valuations and measures of differences in valuations for two goods, something that is particularly important for policymaking since consumer valuations can reflect their support for efforts to address externalities associated with consumer goods or may reflect other consumer sentiments, such as food safety concerns.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 57 条
[1]  
Ahlheim M., 2000, Zeitschrift fur Umweltpolitik Umweltrecht, V23, P253
[2]   Risk perception and bottled water use [J].
Anadu, EC ;
Harding, AK .
JOURNAL AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION, 2000, 92 (11) :82-+
[3]   Addressing negative willingness to pay in dichotomous choice contingent valuation [J].
Bohara, AK ;
Kerkvliet, J ;
Berrens, RP .
ENVIRONMENTAL & RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 2001, 20 (03) :173-195
[4]  
BOYCE RR, 1992, AM ECON REV, V82, P1366
[5]  
Bray J., 2015, CULTURAL COGNITION C
[6]   Respondent experience and contingent valuation of environmental goods [J].
Cameron, TA ;
Englin, J .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 1997, 33 (03) :296-313
[7]   Heterogeneity in the WTP for recreational access: distributional aspects [J].
Campbell, Danny ;
Vedel, Suzanne Elizabeth ;
Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark ;
Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2014, 57 (08) :1200-1219
[8]   AM I GETTING A GOOD DEAL? REFERENCE-DEPENDENT DECISION MAKING WHEN THE REFERENCE PRICE IS UNCERTAIN [J].
Caputo, Vincenzina ;
Lusk, Jayson L. ;
Nayga, Rodolfo M. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2020, 102 (01) :132-153
[9]   Contingent valuation: Theoretical advances and empirical tests since the NOAA panel [J].
Carson, RT .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 1997, 79 (05) :1501-1507
[10]   Toward a new welfare economics for sustainability [J].
Gowdy, J .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2005, 53 (02) :211-222