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. (...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Applied economics letters 1999-05, Vol.6 (5), p.267-269
Main Author: NEILL, HELEN R.
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary: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.
ISSN:1350-4851
1466-4291
DOI:10.1080/135048599353195