Consequentiality, Elicitation Formats, and the Willingness to Pay for Green Electricity: Evidence from Germany

References

1. ↵
   1. Abdulai, Awudu, and
   2. Wallace Huffman

   . 2014. “The Adoption and Impact of Soil and Water Conservation Technology: An Endogenous Switching Regression Application.” Land Economics 90 (1): 26–43.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
2. ↵
   1. Ami, Dominique,
   2. Frederic Aprahamian,
   3. Olivier Chanel, and
   4. Stephane Luchini

   . 2011. “A Test of Cheap Talk in Different Hypothetical Contexts: The Case of Air Pollution.” Environmental and Resource Economics 50 (1): 111–30.

   OpenUrl
3. ↵
   1. Andor, Mark A.,
   2. Manuel Frondel, and
   3. Colin Vance

   . 2017a. “Germany's Energiewende: A Tale of Increasing Costs and Decreasing Willingness-to-Pay.” Energy Journal 38 (S1): 211–28.

   OpenUrl
4. ↵
   1. Andor, Mark A.,
   2. Manuel Frondel, and
   3. Colin Vance

   . 2017b. “Mitigating Hypothetical Bias: Evidence on the Effects of Correctives from a Large Field Study.” Environmental and Resource Economics 68 (3): 777–96.

   OpenUrl
5. ↵
   1. Angrist, Joshua D., and
   2. Jorn-Steffen Pischke

   . 2009. Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6. ↵
   1. Arrow, Kenneth,
   2. Robert Solow,
   3. Paul R. Portney,
   4. Edward E. Leamer,
   5. Roy Radner, and
   6. Howard Schuman

   . 1993. “Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation.” Federal Register 58 (10): 4601–14.

   OpenUrl
7. ↵
   1. Balistreri, Edward,
   2. Gary McClelland,
   3. Gregory Poe, and
   4. William Schulze

   . 2001. “Can Hypo-thetical Questions Reveal True Values? A Laboratory Comparison of Dichotomous Choice and Open-Ended Contingent Values with Auction Values.” Environmental and Resource Economics 18 (3): 275–92.

   OpenUrl
8. ↵
   1. Bishop, Richard C., and
   2. Thomas A. Heber-lein

   . 1979. “Measuring Values of Extramar-ket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 61(5):926–930.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
9. ↵
   1. Brown, Thomas C.,
   2. Patricia A. Champ,
   3. Richard C. Bishop, and
   4. Daniel W. McCollum

   . 1996. “Which Response Format Reveals the Truth about Donations to a Public Good?” Land Economics 72 (2): 152–66.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
10. ↵
    1. Bulte, Erwin,
    2. Shelby Gerking,
    3. John A. List, and
    4. Aart De Zeeuw

    . 2005. “The Effect of Varying the Causes of Environmental Problems on Stated WTP Values: Evidence from a Field Study.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 49 (2): 330–42.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
11. ↵
    1. Cameron, Adrian C., and
    2. Pravin K. Trivedi

    . 2009. Microeconometrics Using STATA. Vol. 5. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
12. ↵
    1. Carson, Richard T., and
    2. Theodore Groves

    . 2007. “Incentive and Informational Properties of Preference Questions.” Environmental and Resource Economics 37 (1): 181–210.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
13. ↵
    1. Carson, Richard T.,
    2. Theodore Groves, and
    3. John A. List

    . 2014. “Consequentially: A Theoretical and Experimental Exploration of a Single Binary Choice.” Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists 1 (1/2): 171–207.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
14. ↵
    1. Cummings, Ronald G., and
    2. Laura O. Taylor

    . 1999. “Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method.” American Economic Review 89 (3): 649–65.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
15. ↵
    1. Czajkowski, Mikolaj,
    2. Christian A. Vossler,
    3. Wiktor Budzinski,
    4. Aleksandra Wisniewska, and
    5. Ewa Zawojska

    . 2017. “Addressing Empirical Challenges Related to the Incentive Compatibility of Stated Preferences Methods.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 142: 47–63.

    OpenUrl
16. ↵
    1. Czarnitzki, Dirk, and
    2. Hanna Hottenrott

    . 2017. “Inter-organizational Collaboration and Financing Constraints for R&D.” Economics Letters 161: 15–18.

    OpenUrl
17. ↵
    1. Di Falco, Salvatore,
    2. Marcella Veronesi, and
    3. Mah-mud Yesuf

    . 2011. “Does Adaptation to Climate Change Provide Food Security? A Micro-perspective from Ethiopia.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 93 (3): 829–46.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
18. ↵
    1. Ethier, Robert G.,
    2. Gregory L. Poe,
    3. William D. Schulze, and
    4. Jeremy Clark

    . 2000. “A Compar-ison of Hypothetical Phone and Mail Contingent Valuation Responses for Green-Pricing Electricity Programs.” Land Economics 76 (1): 54–67.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
19. ↵
    1. Gibbard, Allan

    . 1973. “Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result.” Econometrica 41 (4): 587–601.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
20. ↵
    1. Groothuis, Peter A.,
    2. Tanga M. Mohr,
    3. John C. Whitehead, and
    4. Kristan Cockerill

    . 2017. “En-dogenous Consequentiality in Stated Preference Referendum Data: The Influence of the Randomly Assigned Tax Amount.” Land Economics 93 (2): 258–68.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
21. ↵
    1. Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte,
    2. Mette Lundsby Jensen, and
    3. Trine Kjaer

    . 2014. “Framing the Willing-ness-to-Pay question: Impact on Response Patterns and Mean Willingness to Pay.” Health Economics 23 (5): 550–63.

    OpenUrl
22. ↵
    1. Halvorsen, Bente, and
    2. Kjartan Srelensminde

    . 1998. “Differences between Willingness-to-Pay Estimates from Open-Ended and Discrete-Choice Contingent Valuation Methods: The Effects of Heteroscedasticity.” Land Economics 74 (2): 262–82.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
23. ↵
    1. Harrison, Glenn W.

    2006. “Experimental Evidence on Alternative Environmental Valuation Methods.” Environmental and Resource Economics 34 (1): 125–62.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
24. ↵
    1. Harrison, Glenn W. and
    2. E. Elisabet Rutstrom

    . 2008. “Experimental Evidence on the Existence of Hypothetical Bias in Value Elicitation Methods.” Handbook of Experimental Economics Results 1: 752–67.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
25. ↵
    1. Herriges, Joseph,
    2. Catherine Kling,
    3. Chih-Chen Liu, and
    4. Justin Tobias

    . 2010. “What Are the Consequences of Consequentiality?” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 59 (1): 67–81.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
26. ↵
    1. Hwang, Joonghyun,
    2. Daniel R. Petrolia, and
    3. Matthew G. Interis

    . 2014. “Consequentiality and Opt-Out Responses in Stated Preference Surveys.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 43 (3): 471.

    OpenUrl
27. ↵
    1. Jobstvogt, Niels,
    2. Nick Hanley,
    3. Stephen Hynes,
    4. Jasper Kenter, and
    5. Ursula Witte

    . 2014. “Twenty Thousand Sterling under the Sea: Estimating the Value of Protecting Deep-Sea Biodiversity.” Ecological Economics 97: 10–19.

    OpenUrl
28. ↵
    1. Johannesson, Magnus,
    2. Bengt Liljas, and
    3. Per-Olov Johansson

    . 1998. “An Experimental Comparison of Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Questions and Real Purchase Decisions.” Applied Economics 30 (5): 643–47.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
29. ↵
    1. Johnston, Robert J.,
    2. Kevin J. Boyle,
    3. Wiktor Ada-mowicz,
    4. Jeff Bennett,
    5. Roy Brouwer,
    6. Trudy Ann Cameron,
    7. W. Michael Hanemann et al

    . 2017. “Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies.” Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists 4 (2): 319–405.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
30. ↵
    1. Kealy, Mary Jo, and
    2. Robert W. Turner

    . 1993. “A Test of the Equality of Closed-Ended and Open- Ended Contingent Valuations.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75 (2): 321–31.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
31. ↵
    1. Kotchen, Matthew J.

    2006. “Green Markets and Private Provision of Public Goods.” Journal of Political Economy 114 (4): 816–34.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
32. ↵
    1. Maddala, G. S.

    1983. Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. ↵
    1. Menges, Roland,
    2. Carsten Schroeder, and
    3. Stefan Traub

    . 2005. “Altruism, Warm Glow and the Willingness-to-Donate for Green Electricity: An Artefactual Field Experiment.” Environmental and Resource Economics 31 (4): 431–58.

    OpenUrl
34. ↵
    1. Morgan, O. Ashton,
    2. William L. Huth, and
    3. Paul Hindsley

    . 2018. “Examining the Perceptions and Effects of Survey Consequentiality across Population Subgroups.” Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis 9 (2): 305–22.

    OpenUrl
35. ↵
    1. Nepal, Mani,
    2. Robert P. Berrens, and
    3. Alok K. Bo-hara

    . 2009. “Assessing Perceived Consequentiality: Evidence from a Contingent Valuation Survey on Global Climate Change.” International Journal of Ecological Economics and Statistics 14 (P09): 14–29.

    OpenUrl
36. ↵
    1. Poe, Gregory L.,
    2. Jeremy E. Clark,
    3. Daniel Rondeau, and
    4. William D. Schulze

    . 2002. “Provision and Field Validity Tests of Contingent Valuation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 23 (1): 105–31.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
37. ↵
    1. Rose, Steven K.,
    2. Jeremy Clark,
    3. Gregory L. Poe,
    4. Daniel Rondeau, and
    5. William D. Schulze

    . 2002. “The Private Provision of Public Goods: Tests of a Provision Point Mechanism for Funding Green Power Programs.” Resource and Energy Economics 24 (1): 131–55.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
38. ↵
    1. RWI and forsa

    . 2005. “The German Residential Energy Consumption Survey 2003.” Study commissioned by the German Ministry for Economics and Energy (BMWi). Available at https://www.rwi-essen.de/media/content/pages/publikationen/rwi-projektberichte/PB_Energieverbrauch-priv-HH-2003.pdf.
39. ↵
    1. RWI and forsa

    . 2015. “The German Residential Energy Consumption Survey 2011–2013.” Study commissioned by the German Ministry for Economics and Energy (BMWi). Available at https://en.rwi-essen.de/media/content/pages/publikationen/rwi-projektberichte/rwi-pb_energieverbrauch-priv-hh.pdf.
40. ↵
    1. Satterthwaite, Mark Allen

    . 1975. “Strategy-Proofness and Arrow’s Conditions: Existence and Correspondence Theorems for Voting Procedures and Social Welfare Functions.” Journal of Economic Theory 10 (2): 187–217.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
41. ↵
    1. Seller, Christine,
    2. John R. Stoll, and
    3. Jean-Paul Chavas

    . 1985. “Validation of Empirical Measures of Welfare Change: A Comparison of Nonmarket Techniques.” Land Economics 61 (2): 156–75.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
42. ↵
    1. van der Pol, Marjon,
    2. Alan Shiell,
    3. Flora Au,
    4. David Johnston, and
    5. Suzanne Tough

    . 2008. “Convergent Validity between a Discrete Choice Experiment and a Direct, Open-Ended Method: Comparison of Preferred Attribute Levels and Willingness to Pay Estimates.” Social Science & Medicine 67 (12): 2043–50.

    OpenUrl
43. ↵
    1. Veronesi, Marcella,
    2. Fabienne Chawla,
    3. Max Maurer, and
    4. Judit Lienert

    . 2014. “Climate Change and the Willingness to Pay to Reduce Ecological and Health Risks from Wastewater Flooding in Urban Centers and the Environment.” Ecological Economics 98: 1–10.

    OpenUrl
44. ↵
    1. Vossler, Christian A.,
    2. Maurice Doyon, and
    3. Daniel Rondeau

    . 2012. “Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments.” American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 4 (4): 145–71.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
45. ↵
    1. Vossler, Christian A., and
    2. J. Scott Holladay

    . 2018. “Alternative Value Elicitation Formats in Contingent Valuation: Mechanism Design and Convergent Validity.” Journal of Public Economics 165: 133–45.

    OpenUrl
46. ↵
    1. Vossler, Christian A., and
    2. Sharon B. Watson

    . 2013. “Understanding the Consequences of Consequentiality: Testing the Validity of Stated Preferences in the Field.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 86: 137–47.

    OpenUrl
47. ↵
    1. Whitehead, John C., and
    2. Todd L. Cherry

    . 2007. “Willingness to Pay for a Green Energy Program: A Comparison of Ex-ante and Ex-post Hypothetical Bias Mitigation Approaches.” Resource and Energy Economics 29 (4): 247–61.

    OpenUrl
48. ↵
    1. Zawojska, Ewa,
    2. Anna Bartczak, and
    3. Mikolaj Czajkowski

    . 2019. “Disentangling the Effects of Policy and Payment Consequentiality and Risk Attitudes on Stated Preferences.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 93: 63–84.

    OpenUrl