Stand-up economist: Grading Economics Textbooks on Climate Change
Yoram Bauman: This is the fifth such review I’ve been involved in and it is almost certainly the last review I’ll be doing, for the simple reason that the vast majority of textbooks now have excellent content on climate change! (If
Reply to “Reply to Whitehead” by Desvousges, Mathews and Train: (4) My treatment of the weighted WTP is biased in favor of the DMT (2015) result/conclusion
DMT (2020) draw attention to my treatment of the weighted WTP estimates. The regression model for the second scenario has a negative sign for the constant and a positive sign for the slope. When I "mechanically" calculate WTP for the
Reply to “Reply to Whitehead” by Desvousges, Mathews and Train: (2) What is the effect of negative WTP?
When dichotomous choice CVM data is of low quality, the measure of central tendancy is sensitive to assumptions. As I showed in a paper presented earlier this year (Landry and Whitehed 2020), with the highest quality data it makes no
Reply to “Reply to Whitehead” by Desvousges, Mathews and Train: (1) Is the log-linear model meaningless?
When dichotomous choice CVM data has a negative WTP problem, one of the standard corrections is to estimate a log-linear model and present the median WTP. With many estimated log-linear models the mean WTP is undefined. This is because the
Reply to “Reply to Whitehead” by Desvousges, Mathews and Train: (6) Are the DMT (2015) data problems typical in other CVM studies?
In Whitehead (2020) I describe the problems in the DMT (2015) data. It is full of non-monotonicities, flat portions of bid curves and fat tails. A non-monotonicity is when the percentage of respondents in favor of a policy increases when
The Information Value of Pigouvian Pricing
I recently read an article in the journal Economics and Philosophy, written by Lisa Herzog, which has nothing whatsoever to do with environmental economics but nonetheless I think has interesting implications for it and for Pigouvian pricing in particular. In case
Reply to “Reply to Whitehead” by Desvousges, Mathews and Train (the correction)
As described in the introduction of my (draft) "Reply to 'Reply to Whitehead'", I suspect that I have used the incorrect confidence intervals when analyzing the Desvousges, Mathews and Train (2015) data. Park, Loomis and Creel (1991) introduced the Krinsky-Robb