Critics of stated preference methods argue that hypothetical bias precludes survey techniques from providing reliable economic values for non-market goods and services, rendering estimation of the total economic benefits of public programs fruitless. This paper explores a relatively new methodology to obtain the total value of non-market goods and services—choice experiments—which conveniently provide information on the purchase decision as well as the characteristic value vector. The empirical work revolves around examining behavior in two very different field settings. In the first field study, we explore hypothetical bias in the purchase decision by eliciting contributions for a threshold public good in an actual capital campaign. To extend the analysis a level deeper, in a second field experiment we examine both the purchase decision and the marginal value vector via inspection of consumption decisions in an actual marketplace. In support of the new valuation design, both field experiments provide some evidence that hypothetical choice experiments combined with “cheap talk” can yield credible estimates of the purchase decision. Furthermore, we find no evidence of hypothetical bias when estimating marginal attribute values. Yet, we do find that the “cheap talk” component might induce internal inconsistency of subjects’ preferences in the choice experiment.

We value climate amenities by estimating a discrete location choice model for US households. The utility of each metropolitan statistical area (MSA) depends on location-specific amenities, earnings opportunities, housing costs, and the cost of moving to the MSA from the household head's birthplace. We use the estimated trade-off among wages, housing costs, and climate amenities to value changes in mean winter and summer temperatures. We find that households sort among MSAs as a result of heterogeneous tastes for winter and summer temperatures. Preferences for winter and summer temperatures are negatively correlated: households that prefer milder winters, on average, prefer cooler summers, and households that prefer colder winters prefer warmer summers. Households in the Midwest region, on average, have lower marginal willingness to pay to increase winter and reduce summer temperatures than households in the Pacific and South Atlantic census divisions. We use our results to value changes in winter and summer temperatures for the period 2020 to 2050 under the B1 (climate-friendly) and A2 (more extreme) climate scenarios. On average, households are willing to pay 1 percent of income to avoid the B1 scenario and 2.4 percent of income to avoid the A2 scenario. ; Maureen Cropper, Un iversity of Maryland and Resources for the Future, cropper@rff.o rg. We thank the US Environ mental Protection Agency, RTI Intern ational, and Resources for the Future for funding. This paper would not have been possible without GIS support from RTI. 1 Formally, marginal WTP for an amen ity equals the sum of the slope of the hedonic wage function with respect to the amenity plus the slope of the hedonic property value function, weighted by the share of inco me spent on housing, evaluated at the chosen amenity vector (Roback 1982).

At least one co-author has disclosed a financial relationship of potential relevance for this research. Further information is available online at http://www.nber.org/papers/w18756.ack NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peerreviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.

No abstract

No abstract