| 1. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
A Fair Share : Burden-Sharing Preferences in the United States and China
- 2010
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)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.
|
|
| 2. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
A fair share: Burden-sharing preferences in the United States and China
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Resource and Energy Economics. - 0928-7655. ; 35:1, s. 1-17
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Using a sequential discrete choice experiment, we investigate preferences for distributing the economic burden of reducing 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 relative (1) historical emissions, (2) income level, (3) emissions per capita, and (4) current emissions. We found that respondents overall favored the rule that was least costly for their country. In addition, the willingness to pay was much higher in China, suggesting that how mitigation costs are shared across countries is more important for Chinese than for Americans. To some extent the willingness to pay varies with socioeconomic characteristics and attitudes. For example, university-educated respondents in the United States are willing to pay more for the rule that is the least costly for their own country, compared with those with a lower education level. At the same time, the ranking of the two most preferred rules are generally robust across all socioeconomic groups within each country.
|
|
| 3. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Assessing management options for weed control with demanders and non-demanders in a choice experiment
- 2006
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The yellow floating heart is a water weed causing nuisance problems in Swedish watercourses. An economic analysis of this is required where various management options are considered. The benefits of a management program are to a large extent recreational. Using a choice experiment we estimate the benefits of a weed management program and perform a cost-benefit analysis of different management programs. In order to be able to distinguish between those who have a demand for a program from those who do not, we introduce a way to distinguish demanders from non-demanders in the choice experiments. The advantage of our suggested approach is that we can more clearly distinguish between conditional and unconditional willingness to pay. In the empirical study we find that a share of the respondents are non-demanders. The demander willingness to pay still justifies cutting the weed in certain places in the lake, given that we use a simple cost-benefit rule.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Demand effects in stated preference surveys
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. - : Elsevier BV. - 0095-0696 .- 1096-0449. ; 90, s. 294-302
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- © 2018 Elsevier Inc. We argue that demand effects in stated preference studies are understudied. By demand effects, we mean anything in the survey that unintentionally influences respondents’ beliefs about appropriate behavior, which in turn might affect their responses in the survey. We implement two methods for measuring and implicitly reducing the influence of demand effects. The first approach—random selection of good to be valued—does not have any effect on respondent behavior. The second approach—a demand script and a control question with feedback—has a sizable and statistically significant effect on respondent behavior. In particular, estimated marginal willingness to pay for improvements in water quality are substantially (around 50 percent) lower than a control treatment; we attribute this decrease to a reduced demand effect. Our results suggest that stated preference methods tend to lead to biased willingness-to-pay estimates due to demand effects, but that the bias can be reduced using simple measures.
|
|
| 6. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Det ekonomiska värdet av vattenkvalitetsförbättringar : Vad tycker svenska hushåll?
- 2019
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- I denna rapport redovisas resultatet av en enkätundersökning om de svenska hushållens betalningsvilja för en förbättrad vattenkvalitet i sjöar, vattendrag och kustvatten. Drygt 2000 personer i sex län svarade på enkäten.Resultaten visar betalningsviljan för att förbättra vattenkvaliteten i det egna länet respektive i Sverige i övrigt. Vattenkvaliteten beskrevs i tre nivåer: låg-, medel- och hög vattenkvalitet.Respondenterna fick svara på hur mycket de var villiga att betala för att minska andelen vatten med låg kvalitet, respektive öka andelen vatten med hög kvalitet.Forskarna har utifrån resultaten i enkätstudien tagit fram en genomsnittlig betalningsvilja som kan användas för uppskattningar av värdet av en förbättrad vattenkvalitet i samtliga län i Sverige. I den uppskattade betalningsviljan inkluderas inte värdet av vatten som dricksvattenresurs.
|
|
| 7. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Do EPA administrators recommend environmental policies that citizens want?
- 2008
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- We investigate whether Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator preferences regarding improvements in environmental quality differ from citizen preferences. The scope and significance of the possible difference are assessed by conducting identical choice experiments (CE) on a random sample of Swedish citizens and a random sample of administrators working at the Swedish EPA. The experiment concerns two environmental quality objectives: a Balanced Marine Environment and Clean Air. The EPA administrators were asked to choose the alternatives they would recommend as a policy, while the citizens were asked to act as private persons. We find that the rankings of attributes differ between the two groups, and that there are significant differences in the willingness to pay (WTP) for particular attributes. EPA administrators have a higher WTP for five out of the seven attributes, and in some cases the difference is not only significant but also substantial. We also asked the administrators to motivate their CE choices, and the main motive was ecological sustainability.
|
|
| 8. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Do people exaggerate how happy they are? Using a promise to induce truth-telling
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Oxford Economic Papers. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0030-7653 .- 1464-3812. ; 70:3, s. 784-798
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We investigate a novel approach to reduce measurement error in subjective well-being (SWB) data. Using a between-subject design, half of the subjects are asked to promise to answer the survey questions truthfully to make them commit to truth-telling. We find a statistically significant difference between mean stated well-being between the two samples (with and without a promise). People are consistently found to exaggerate their happiness and for several different aspects of life, without a promise. We then investigate to what extent the differences in stated well-being also affect the inference from regressions models on the determinants of SWB. The effect on the covariates are only weakly statistically significant and only for a few variables, if we compare the samples with and without the promise. Thus, this means that the policy implications based on an SWB study only marginally depends on whether we include a truth-telling question or not.
|
|
| 9. |
- 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/konstnärligt)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.
|
|
| 10. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Doing good with other people’s money: An experiment on people’s (un)willingness to grant others the freedom to choose
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics. - : Elsevier BV. - 2214-8043. ; 71, s. 79-87
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We augment a standard allocation experiment to investigate whether, and to what extent, individuals are willing to limit others’ choices and change their own choices concerning an environmental project when they are given responsibility for others’ decisions. We observe the allocator's own donation, the donation he chooses for his group (including himself), and the minimum donation he requires the other group members to make. We find that donations dictated to the whole group are, on average, lower than individual donations and consistent with the allocator's beliefs about what the other group members donate. Additionally, we observe that most allocators force the others to donate a positive, though low, amount. Thus, unlimited freedom of choice is rejected by the majority of the participants.
|
|
