Emotions, Morality and Public Goods: The WTA-WTP Disparity Revisited
Andréas Nilsson, Olof Johansson‐Stenman, Anders Biel
Abstract
Open-access reader
Andréas Nilsson, Olof Johansson‐Stenman, Anders Biel
Abstract
Open-access reader
Empirical evidence suggests that people’s maximum willingness to pay for having a good is often substantially lower than their minimum willingness to accept not having it, and that this discrepancy tends to be especially large when valuing public goods. This paper hypothesizes that differences in emotions (e.g. regret) and moral perceptions can account for much of this discrepancy for public goods. A simple, real-money dichotomous-choice\nexperiment is set up to test these hypotheses, which are largely supported.
OpenAlex reports 7 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Empirical evidence suggests that people’s maximum willingness to pay for having a good is often substantially lower than their minimum willingness to accept not having it, and that this discrepancy tends to be especially large when valuing public goods. This paper hypothesizes that differences in emotions (e.g. regret) and moral perceptions can account for much of this discrepancy for public goods. A simple, real-money dichotomous-choice\nexperiment is set up to test these hypotheses, which are largely supported.
Key concepts: Regret, Public good, Willingness to pay, Morality, Economics, Willingness to accept, Set (abstract data type), Contingent valuation