Edited by John A. List and Michael K. Price
Chapter 6: Value and outcome uncertainty as explanations for the WTA vs WTP disparity
The frequently observed divergence between an individual’s maximum willingness to pay (WTP) and minimum willingness to accept compensation (WTA) for the same quantity change in a good or service has been the topic of considerable investigation and inquiry. Repeated findings from numerous survey-based contingent valuation field studies are that people report WTA and WTP values that are different, with WTA typically much higher than WTP. These results, obtained in hypothetical valuation exercises, have been corroborated by various experimental laboratory investigations using real monetary payoffs. In the field surveys studies have, for example, reported that the WTA for various types of hunting permits is four to five times higher than the corresponding WTP; and laboratory experiments that elicit values for coffee mugs, chocolate bars and lottery tickets report that WTA is approximately two to four times higher than WTP. The persistence of such disparities, across a variety of settings, has defied any single explanation and is considered a behavioral anomaly. The issue also has considerable policy implications, as in the case of natural resource damage assessment and liability cases (Brown and Gregory, 1999) as well as in civil law cases (Rachlinski and Jourden, 1998).
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.