SwePub
Sök i SwePub databas

  Utökad sökning

Booleska operatorer måste skrivas med VERSALER

Träfflista för sökning "AMNE:(SOCIAL SCIENCES Business and economics) ;srt2:(2010-2011);pers:(Carlsson Fredrik 1968)"

Sökning: AMNE:(SOCIAL SCIENCES Business and economics) > (2010-2011) > Carlsson Fredrik 1968

  • Resultat 1-10 av 27
  • [1]23Nästa
Sortera/gruppera träfflistan
   
NumreringReferensOmslagsbildHitta
1.
  • Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968-, et al. (författare)
  • Funding a New Bridge in Rural Vietnam: A field experiment on conditional cooperation and default contributions
  • 2011
  • Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt)abstract
    • The ability to provide public goods is essential for economic and social development, yet there is very limited empirical evidence regarding contributions to a real local public good in developing countries. This paper analyzes a field experiment where 200 households in rural Vietnam could make real contributions to an archetypical public good, a bridge. In particular, we study the role of two kinds of social influence: i) conditional cooperation, i.e., that people may be more willing to cooperate if others do, and ii) the effects of the default alternative, i.e., that people are influenced by the default alternative presented to them in the choice situation. We find significant and substantial effects of both kinds of influence. For example, by either giving the subjects the additional information that one of the most common contributions by others is 100,000 dong (a relatively low contribution) or introducing a zero-contribution default alternative, the average contribution decreases by about 20% compared to the baseline case.
2.
  • Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968-, et al. (författare)
  • Do you do what you say or do you do what you say others do?
  • 2010
  • Ingår i: Journal of Choice Modelling. - 1755-5345. ; 3:2, s. 113-133
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • We design a donations vs. own money choice experiment and compare the results from three different treatments. In two of the treatments the pay-offs are hypothetical. In the first of these, a short cheap talk script was used and subjects were required to state their own preferences in this scenario. In the second treatment, subjects were asked to state how they believed the average student would respond to the choices. In the third treatment the pay-offs were real, allowing us to use the results to compare the validity of the two hypothetical treatments. Our hypothesis is that when subjects are asked to state how they believe an average person would respond, they will use their own preferences in their responses without using the survey situation for self-enhancement. However, we find a strong hypothetical bias in both hypothetical treatments where the marginal willingness to pay for donations is higher when subjects state their own preferences but lower when subjects state what they believe are other peoples preferences. Our explanation is that subjects use the survey situation to bolster their self-image. We also find that it is mainly women who are prone to hypothetical bias in this study
  •  
3.
  • Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968-, et al. (författare)
  • Value of Statistical Life and Cause of Accident: : A Choice Experiment
  • 2010
  • Ingår i: Risk Analysis. - 0272-4332. ; 30:6, s. 975-986
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • The purpose of this study is to compare the value of statistical life (VSL) estimates for traffic, drowning, and fire accidents. Using a choice experiment in a mail survey of 5,000 Swedish respondents we estimated the willingness to pay for risk reductions in the three accidents. In the experiment respondents were asked a series of questions, whether they would choose risk reducing investments where type of accident, cost of the investment, the risk reduction acquired, and the baseline risk varied between questions. The VSLs for fire and drowning accidents were found to be about 1/3 lower than that for traffic accidents. Although respondents worry more about traffic accidents, this alone cannot explain the difference in VSL estimates. The difference between fire and drowning accidents was not found to be statistically significant
  •  
4.
  • Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968-, et al. (författare)
  • Doing good with other people’s money: A charitable giving experiment with students in environmental sciences and economics
  • 2011
  • Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt)abstract
    • We augment a standard dictator game to investigate how preferences for an environmental project relate to willingness to limit others’ choices. We explore this issue by distinguishing three student groups: economists, environmental economists, and environmental social scientists. We find that people are generally disposed to grant freedom of choice, but only within certain limits. In addition, our results are in line with the widely held belief that economists are more selfish than other people. Yet, against the notion of consumer sovereignty, economists are not less likely to restrict others’ choices and impose restrictions closer to their own preferences than the other student groups.
5.
  •  
6.
  •  
7.
  • Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968-, et al. (författare)
  • A Fair Share : Burden-Sharing Preferences in the United States and China
  • 2010
  • Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt)abstract
    • Using a choice experiment, we investigated preferences for distributing the economic burden of decreasing CO2 emissions in the two largest CO2-emitting countries: the United States and China. We asked respondents about their preferences for four burden-sharing rules to reduce CO2 emissions according to their country’s 1) historical emissions, 2) income level, 3) equal right to emit per person, and 4) current emissions. We found that U.S. respondents preferred the rule based on current emissions, while the equal right to emit rule was clearly least preferred. The Chinese respondents, on the other hand, preferred the historical rule, while the current emissions rule was the least preferred. Respondents overall favored the rule that was least costly for their country. These marked differences may explain the difficulties countries face in agreeing how to share costs, presenting a tough hurdle to overcome in future negotiations. We also found that the strength of the preferences was much stronger in China, suggesting that how mitigation costs are shared across countries is more important there.
8.
  •  
9.
  •  
10.
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Resultat 1-10 av 27
  • [1]23Nästa
 
pil uppåt Stäng

Kopiera och spara länken för att återkomma till aktuell vy