Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T11:36:57.846Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimating Hypothetical Bias in Economically Emergent Africa: A Generic Public Good Experiment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Arthur J. Caplan ,
David Aadland  and
Anthony Macharia
Arthur J. Caplan
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Economics at Utah State University in Logan, Utah
David Aadland
Affiliation:
Department of Economics and Finance at the University of Wyoming in Laramie, Wyoming
Anthony Macharia
Affiliation:
Department of Economics at the University of Botswana in Gaborone, Botswana
Get access

Abstract

This paper reports results from a contingent valuation based public good experiment conducted in the African nation of Botswana. In a sample of university students, we find evidence that stated willingness to contribute to a public good in a hypothetical setting is higher than actual contribution levels. However, results from regression analysis suggest that this is true only in the second round of the experiment, when participants making actual contributions have learned to significantly lower their contribution levels. As globalization expands markets, and economies such as Botswana's continue to modernize, there is a growing need to understand how hypothetical bias will influence the valuation of public goods.

Keywords

hypothetical biaspublic goodwillingness to payBotswana
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 344 - 358
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aadland, D., and Caplan, A.J. 2006. “Cheap Talk Reconsidered: New Evidence from CVM.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 60(4): 562–578.Google Scholar
Ajzen, I., Brown, T.C., and Rosenthal, L.H. 1996. “Information Bias in Contingent Valuation: Effects of Personal Relevance, Quality of Information, and Motivational Orientation.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30(1): 43–57.Google Scholar
Andreoni, J. 1988. “Why Free Ride? Strategies and Learning in Public Goods Experiments.” Journal of Public Economics 37(3): 291–304.Google Scholar
Andreoni, J. 1995. “Cooperation in Public-Goods Experiments: Kindness or Confusion?” American Economic Review 85(4): 891–904.Google Scholar
Andreoni, J., and McGuire, M.C. 1993. “Identifying the Free Riders: A Simple Algorithm for Determining Who Will Contribute to a Public Good.” Journal of Public Economics 51(3): 447–454.Google Scholar
Ayer, M., Brunk, H.D., Ewing, G.M., Reid, W.T., and Silverman, E. 1955. “An Empirical Distribution Function for Sampling with Incomplete Information.” Annals of Mathematical Statistics 26(4): 641–647.Google Scholar
Bernheim, D. 1994. “A Theory of Conformity.” Journal of Political Economy 102(5): 841–877.Google Scholar
Boman, M., Bostedt, G., and Kriström, B. 1999. “Obtaining Welfare Bounds in Discrete-Response Valuation Studies: A Non-Parametric Approach.” Land Economics 75(2): 284–294.Google Scholar
Cameron, L.A. 1999. “Raising the Stakes in the Ultimatum Game: Experimental Evidence from Indonesia.” Economic Inquiry 37(1): 209–219.Google Scholar
Cardenas, J.C., and Carpenter, J. 2008. “Behavioural Development Economics: Lessons from the Field Labs in the Developing World.” Journal of Development Studies 44(3): 311–338.Google Scholar
Carson, R.T., Flores, N.E., Martin, K.M., and Wright, J.L. 1996. “Contingent Valuation and Revealed Preference Methodologies: Comparing Estimates for Quasi-Public Goods.” Land Economics 72(1) 80–99.Google Scholar
Carson, R.T., and Groves, T. 2007. “Incentive and Informational Properties of Preference Questions.” Environmental and Resource Economics 37(1): 181–210.Google Scholar
Champ, P.A., and Bishop, R.C. 2001. “Donation Payment Mechanisms and Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias.” Environmental and Resource Economics 19(4): 383–402.Google Scholar
Champ, P.A., Flores, N.E., Brown, T.C., and Chivers, J. 2002. “Contingent Valuation and Incentives.” Land Economics 78(4): 591–604.Google Scholar
CIA World Factbook. 2006. Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Botswana#CIA_World_Factbook_demographic_statistics (accessed January 8, 2009).Google Scholar
Cummings, R.G., Elliott, S., Harrison, G.W., and Murphy, J. 1997. “Are Hypothetical Referenda Incentive Compatible?” Journal of Political Economy 105(3): 609–621.Google Scholar
Cummings, R.G., and Harrison, G.W. 1994. “Was the Ohio Court Well Informed in Its Assessment of the Accuracy of the Contingent Valuation Method?” Natural Resources Journal 34(1): 1–36.Google Scholar
Cummings, R.G., Harrison, G.W., and Rutström, E.E. 1995. “Homegrown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous Choice Approach Incentive-Compatible?” American Economic Review 85(1): 260–266.Google Scholar
Cummings, R.G., and Taylor, L.O. 1999. “Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method.” American Economic Review 89(3): 649–666.Google Scholar
Ehmke, M.D., Lusk, J.L., and List, J.A. 2008. “Is Hypothetical Bias a Universal Phenomenon? A Multi-National Investigation.” Land Economics 84(3): 489–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, W.H. 2008. Econometric Analysis (6th edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Google Scholar
Haab, T.C., Huang, J.C., and Whitehead, J.C. 1999. “Are Hypothetical Referenda Incentive Compatible? A Comment.” Journal of Political Economy 107(1): 186–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, G.W. 2006. “Experimental Evidence on Alternative Environmental Valuation Methods.” Environmental and Resource Economics 34(1): 125–162.Google Scholar
Harrison, G.W., Beekman, R.L., Brown, L.B., Clements, L.A., McDaniel, T.M., Odom, S.L., and Williams, M. 1999. “Environmental Damage Assessment with Hypothetical Surveys: The Calibration Approach.” In Boman, M., Brännlund, R., and Kriström, B., eds., Topics in Environmental Economics. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, G.W., and List, J.A. 2004. “Field Experiments.” Journal of Economic Literature 42(4): 1009–1055.Google Scholar
Harrison, G.W., and Rutström, E.E. 2006. “Experimental Evidence on the Existence of Hypothetical Bias in Value Elicitation Methods.” In Plott, C. and Smith, V., eds., Handbook of Experimental Economics Results (Vol. 1). New York: Elsevier Press.Google Scholar
Henrich, J. 2000. “Does Culture Matter? Ultimatum Bargaining Among the Machiguenga of the Peruvian Amazon.” American Economic Review 90(4): 973–979.Google Scholar
Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., Gintis, H., and McElreath, R. 2001. “In Search of Homo Economicus: Behavioral Experiments in 15 Small-Scale Societies.” American Economic Review 91(2): 73–78.Google Scholar
Hogg, R.V., and Craig, A. 1978. Introduction to Mathematical Statistics (4th edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Google Scholar
Houser, D., and Kurzban, R. 2002. “Revisiting Kindness and Confusion in Public Goods Experiments.” American Economic Review 92(4): 1062–1069.Google Scholar
Huck, S., and Weizäcker, G. 2002. “Do Players Correctly Estimate What Others Do? Evidence of Conservation in Beliefs.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 47(1): 71–85.Google Scholar
Johannesson, M. 1997. “Some Further Experimental Results on Hypothetical versus Real Willingness to Pay.” Applied Economics Letters 4(8): 535–536.Google Scholar
Johnston, R.J. 2006. “Is Hypothetical Bias Universal? Validating Contingent Valuation Responses Using a Binding Public Referendum.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 52(1): 469–481.Google Scholar
Kachelmeier, S.J., and Shehata, M. 1992. “Examining Risk Preferences under High Monetary Incentives: Experimental Evidence from the People's Republic of China.” American Economic Review 82(5): 1120–1141.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., and Knetsch, J.L. 1992. “Valuing Public Goods: The Purchase of Moral Satisfaction.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 22(1): 57–70.Google Scholar
Kriström, B. 1990. “A Non-Parametric Approach to the Estimation of Welfare Measures in Discrete Response Valuation Studies.” Land Economics 66(2): 135–139.Google Scholar
Landry, C.E., and List, J.A. 2007. “Using Ex Ante Approaches to Obtain Credible Signals for Value in Contingent Markets: Evidence from the Field.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 89(2): 420–429.Google Scholar
Ledyard, J.O. 1995. “Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research.” In Kagel, J.H. and Roth, A.E., eds., Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
List, J.A. 2001. “Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auction Experiments.” American Economic Review 91(5): 1498–1507.Google Scholar
List, J.A. 2003. “Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies?” Quarterly Journal of Economics 118(1): 41–71.Google Scholar
List, J.A. 2006. “The Behavioralist Meets the Market: Measuring Social Preferences and Reputation Effects in Actual Transactions.” Journal of Political Economy 114(1): 1–37.Google Scholar
List, J.A., Berrens, R.P., Bohara, A.K., and Kerkvliet, J. 2004. “Examining the Role of Social Isolation on Stated Preferences.” American Economic Review 94(3): 741–752.Google Scholar
List, J.A., and Gallet, C. 2001. “What Experimental Protocols Influence Disparities between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?” Environmental and Resource Economics 20(3): 241–254.Google Scholar
List, J.A., and Shogren, J.F. 1998. “Calibration of the Difference between Actual and Hypothetical Evaluations in a Field Experiment.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 37(2): 193–205.Google Scholar
Little, J., and Berrens, R. 2004. “Explaining Disparities between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values: Further Investigation Using Meta-Analysis.” Economic Bulletin 3(1): 1–13.Google Scholar
Lusk, J.L., and Norwood, F.B. Forthcoming. “Bridging the Gap between Laboratory Experiments and Naturally Occurring Markets: An Inferred Valuation Method.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.Google Scholar
Marwell, G., and Ames, R.E. 1981. “Economists Free Ride, Does Anyone Else?” Journal of Public Economics 15(3): 295–310.Google Scholar
Murphy, J.J., Allen, P.G., Stevens, T.H., and Weatherhead, D. 2005. “A Meta-Analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 30(3): 313–325.Google Scholar
Murphy, J.J., and Stevens, T.H. 2004. “Contingent Valuation, Hypothetical Bias, and Experimental Economics.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 33(2): 182–192.Google Scholar
Palfrey, T.R., and Prisbrey, J.E. 1997. “Anomalous Behavior in Public Goods Experiments: How Much and Why?” American Economic Review 87(5): 829–846.Google Scholar
Pearce, D., Pearce, C., and Palmer, C. 2002. Valuing the Environment in Developing Countries: Case Studies. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Rondeau, D., Schulze, W. D., and Poe, G.L. 1999. “Voluntary Revelation of the Demand for Public Goods Using a Provision Point Mechanism.” Journal of Public Economics 72(3): 455–470.Google Scholar
Roth, A.E., Prasnikar, V., Okuno-Fujiwara, M., and Zamir, S. 1991. “Bargaining and Market Behavior in Jerusalem, Ljubljana, Pittsburgh, and Tokyo: An Experimental Study.” American Economic Review 81(5): 1068–1095.Google Scholar
Shogren, J.F. 2006. “Valuation in the Lab.” Environmental and Resource Economics 34(1): 163–172.Google Scholar
Slonim, R., and Roth, A.E. 1998. “Learning in High Stakes Ultimatum Games: An Experiment in the Slovak Republic.” Econometrica 66(3): 569–596.Google Scholar
Smith, V.L. 1976. “Experimental Economics: Induced Value Theory.” American Economic Review 66(2): 274–279.Google Scholar
Smith, V.K. 1999. “Of Birds and Books: More on Hypothetical Referenda.” Journal of Political Economy 107(1): 197–200.Google Scholar
Smith, V.K., and Desvousges, W.H. 1986. Measuring Water Quality Benefits. Boston, MA: Kluwer Nijhoff Publishing.Google Scholar
Smith, V.K., and Mansfield, C. 1998. “Buying Time: Real and Hypothetical Offers.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 36(3): 209–224.Google Scholar
Taylor, L.O., McKee, M., Laury, S.K., and Cummings, R.G. 2001. “Induced-Value Tests of the Referendum Voting Mechanism.” Economics Letters 71(1): 61–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vossler, C.A., and Kerkvliet, J. 2003. “A Criterion Validity Test of the Contingent Valuation Method: Comparing Hypothetical and Actual Voting Behavior for a Public Referendum.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 45(3): 631–649.Google Scholar
Vossler, C.A., and McKee, M. 2006. “Induced-Value Tests of Contingent Valuation Elicitation Mechanisms.” Environmental and Resource Economics 35(2): 137–168.Google Scholar
World Bank. 2009. “Education at a Glance: Botswana.” Available at http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTEDSTATS/Resources/3232763-1171296190619/3445877-1172014191219/BWA.pdf (accessed January 8, 2009).Google Scholar
World Bank Group. 2000. “Botswana: An Example of Prudent Economic Policy and Growth.” Africa Region Findings No. 161. Available at http://www.worldbank.org/afr/findings/english/find161.htm (accessed November 29, 2007).Google Scholar
World Resources Institute. 2009. “Earthtrends Economic Indicators—Botswana.” Available at http://earthtrends.wri.org/pdf_library/country_profiles/eco_cou_072.pdf (accessed January 8, 2009).Google Scholar