Hypothetical versus real willingness to pay: comment
The purpose of this comment is to examine the experimental design and empirical results presented by Johannesson, M., Liljas, B. and Peterson, G. (Applied Economics Letters, 4, 1997). Their paper attempts to confirm the Neill, H. R., Cummings, R. G., Ganderton, P., Harrison, G. W. and McGuckin, T. (Land Economics, 70, 1994) results. Their results are noteworthy since they find no statistical difference between real and hypothetical willingness-to-pay responses between groups. Their results also differ from earlier studies where hypothetical willingness to pay exceeds actual willingness to pay. This comment will examine important differences between the two studies. These differences make any substantive comparison of results difficult, if not impossible.
Year of publication: |
1999
|
---|---|
Authors: | Neill, Helen |
Published in: |
Applied Economics Letters. - Taylor & Francis Journals, ISSN 1350-4851. - Vol. 6.1999, 5, p. 267-269
|
Publisher: |
Taylor & Francis Journals |
Saved in:
freely available
Saved in favorites
Similar items by person
-
EVALUATING THE WELFARE EFFECTS OF SCHOOL QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS: A RESIDENTIAL SORTING APPROACH
Tra, Constant I., (2013)
-
HUD versus Private Bank Foreclosures: A Spatial and Temporal Analysis
Carroll, Thomas M., (1995)
-
Year-round school schedules and residential property values
Clauretie, Terrence M., (2000)
- More ...