[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-16-31.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Much Relevance Does Reality Imply? (Re)Considering the Endowment Effect

Author

Listed:
  • Brennan, Timothy J.

    (Resources for the Future)

Abstract
A leading approach to understanding significant discrepancies between observed willingness to pay (WTP) and willingness to accept (WTA) in policy evaluation is the “endowment effect”—that preferences are based on a reference point or anchor that leads WTA to exceed WTP. Unlike assertions that consumers make biased choices not reflecting their underlying welfare, the endowment effect possibility is consistent with neoclassical economics. Examples where endowments matter suggest they are not malleable. WTA can exceed WTP if endowments differ across contexts. “Loss aversion” interpretations do not apply, as those concern the utility of money, not willingness to give up one good for another. Kinked indifference curves can increase WTA over WTP, but calling the quantity at the kink an “endowment” adds nothing to the concept. A likely interpretation of the endowment effect is normative: WTA should be relevant to policy evaluations where consumers should have something they currently do not.

Suggested Citation

  • Brennan, Timothy J., 2016. "How Much Relevance Does Reality Imply? (Re)Considering the Endowment Effect," RFF Working Paper Series dp-16-31, Resources for the Future.
    • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-16-31
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-16-31.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    endowment effect; willingness to accept; willingness to pay; policy evaluation; loss aversion;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-16-31. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.