Citizens Show Strong Support for Climate Policy, But Are They Also Willing to Pay?

To what extent citizens are willing not only to support ambitious climate policy, but also willing to pay for such policy remains subject to debate. Our analysis addresses three issues in this regard: whether, as is widely assumed but not empirically established, willingness to support (WTS) is higher than willingness to pay (WTP); whether the determinants of the two are similar; and what accounts for within-subject similarity between WTS and WTP. We address these issues based on data from an original nationally representative survey (N=2500) on forest conservation in Brazil, arguably the key climate policy issue in the country. The findings reveal that WTP is much lower than WTS. The determinants differ to some extent as well; regarding the effects of age, gender, and trust in government. The analysis also provides insights into factors influencing how much WTS and WTP line up within individuals, with respect to age, education, political ideology, salience of the deforestation issue, and trust in government. Our findings provide a more nuanced picture of how strong public support for climate change policy is, and a starting point for more targeted climate policy communication

Endogenous determination of historical amenities and the residential location choice

R11, R14, R31,

Test–Retest Reliability of Choice Experiments in Environmental Valuation

The paper presents the results of the first test-retest study on choice experiments in environmental valuation. In a survey concerning landscape externalities of onshore wind power in central Germany, respondents answered the same five choice sets at two different points in time. Each choice set comprised three alternatives described by five attributes, and the time interval between the test and the retest was eleven months. The analysis takes place at three different levels, investigating choice consistency at the choice task level and repeatability of the latent construct utility at the level of parametric models as well as at the level of willingness-to-pay estimates. At the choice task level we observed 59% identical choices. The parametric analysis shows that the test and retest estimates are not equal, even when we control for scale, that is, differences in the error variance. However, comparing the marginal willingness-to-pay estimates among test and retest reveals only a statistically significant difference for one of the attributes. Overall, this indicates a moderate test-retest reliability taking into account that consistency at the choice task level overlooks the stochastic nature of the process underlying discrete choice experiments

Convergent Validity of Attribute-Based, Choice Questions in Stated-Preference Studies

Non-market valuation, Stated prederences, Attribute-based valuation, Choice experiments, Convergent validity, Monetary incentive, Incentive compatibility, Status-quo option, Famland protection,