Stated Preferences with Survey Consequentiality and Outcome Uncertainty: A Split Sample Discrete Choice Experiment

被引:0
作者
Tensay Hadush Meles
Razack Lokina
Erica Louis Mtenga
Julieth Julius Tibanywana
机构
[1] Economic and Social Research Institute,Department of Economics
[2] Trinity College Dublin,School of Economics
[3] University of Dar es Salaam,undefined
来源
Environmental and Resource Economics | 2023年 / 86卷
关键词
Stated preferences; Survey consequentiality; Outcome uncertainty; Discrete choice experiment; Power outages; Business enterprises; Tanzania; D22; D81; L94; Q58;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Stated preference studies are often based on the assumptions that proposed outcomes would realize with certainty and respondents believe their survey responses are consequential. This paper uses split sample treatments to test whether survey consequentiality and outcome uncertainty lead to differences in welfare measures, focusing on a discrete choice experiment on improving quality of electricity supply among business enterprises in Tanzania. Our results show that incorporating uncertainty not only affects the preferences for the attribute with uncertainty (duration of power outage) but also for a choice attribute with a precautionary feature (advanced outage notification). While outcome uncertainty and an additional survey script (a formal letter from a state-owned electric utility) to strengthen consequentiality have some influence on preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) estimates for certain attributes, we do not find significant implications on overall welfare estimates.
引用
收藏
页码:717 / 754
页数:37
相关论文
共 187 条
[51]  
Budziński W(2015)Updated value of service reliability estimates for electric utility customers in the United States Web 86 137-undefined
[52]  
Campbell D(2017)Waiting or acting now? The effect on willingness-to-pay of delivering inherent uncertainty information in choice experiments Ecol Econ 82 257-undefined
[53]  
Giergiczny M(2022)Certainty pays off: the public's value of environmental monitoring Ecol Econ 2 209-undefined
[54]  
Hanley N(2013)Understanding the consequences of consequentiality: testing the validity of stated preferences in the field J Econ Behav Organ 90 3401-undefined
[55]  
Daly A(2023)Information, consequentiality and credibility in stated preference surveys: a choice experiment on climate adaptation Environ Resour Econ 62 302-undefined
[56]  
Hess S(2010)What have we learned from 20 years of stated preference research in less-developed countries? Ann Rev Resour Econ 81 531-undefined
[57]  
Train K(2009)Including risk in stated-preference economic valuations: experiments on choices for marine recreation J Environ Manag 93 63-undefined
[58]  
Dohmen T(2017)Willingness to pay for emissions reduction: application of choice modeling under uncertainty and different management options Energy Econ undefined undefined-undefined
[59]  
Falk A(2022)Exploring different assumptions about outcome-related risk perceptions in discrete choice experiments Environ Res Econ undefined undefined-undefined
[60]  
Huffman D(2019)Disentangling the effects of policy and payment consequentiality and risk attitudes on stated preferences J Environ Econ Manag undefined undefined-undefined