IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v86y2004i2p455-466.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Diagrammatic Exposition of Weak Complementarity and the Willig Condition

Author

Listed:
  • V. Kerry Smith
  • H. Spencer Banzhaf

Abstract

This article provides a graphical explanation for one of the most important restrictions to utility functions used in revealed preference approaches for measuring the demand for public goods and product quality—weak complementarity. It also describes how the Willig condition is an important element along with weak complementarity in measuring Hicksian consumer surplus for changes in public goods or quality using Marshallian demand curves. Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • V. Kerry Smith & H. Spencer Banzhaf, 2004. "A Diagrammatic Exposition of Weak Complementarity and the Willig Condition," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 455-466.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:86:y:2004:i:2:p:455-466
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00591.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Spencer Banzhaf, H., 2005. "Green price indices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 262-280, March.
    2. Nicolai V. Kuminoff & V. Kerry Smith & Christopher Timmins, 2010. "The New Economics of Equilibrium Sorting and its Transformational Role for Policy Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 16349, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Smith, V. Kerry & Banzhaf, H. Spencer & Walsh, Randy, 2002. "General Equilibrium Benefit Transfers for Spatial Externalities: Revisiting EPA's Prospective Analysis," RFF Working Paper Series dp-02-44, Resources for the Future.
    4. David G. Brown, 2008. "A Preference-Theoretic Methodology for Nonmarket Goods," Departmental Working Papers 2008-07, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    5. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Laura Blow & Richard Blundell, 2018. "A Nonparametric Revealed Preference Approach to Measuring the Value of Environmental Quality," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(3), pages 503-527, March.
    7. Palmquist, Raymond B., 2005. "Weak complementarity, path independence, and the intuition of the Willig condition," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 103-115, January.
    8. Kuminoff, Nicolai V., 2008. "Recovering Preferences from a Dual-Market Locational Equilibrium," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 5989, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    9. Larson, Douglas M. & Piennar, Elizabeth, 2004. "Time, Weak Complementarity, and Nonuse Value," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 271500, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. V. Smith & Subhrendu Pattanayak, 2002. "Is Meta-Analysis a Noah's Ark for Non-Market Valuation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 271-296, June.
    11. David G. Brown, 2008. "Falsifying the �Goodness� of Nonmarket Goods with Revealed Preference," Departmental Working Papers 2008-08, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    12. V. Smith & Mary Evans & H. Banzhaf & Christine Poulos, 2010. "Can Weak Substitution be Rehabilitated?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 203-221, February.
    13. Bockstael, Nancy E. & Freeman III, A. Myrick, 2006. "Welfare Theory and Valuation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 12, pages 517-570, Elsevier.
    14. H. Spencer Banzhaf, 2021. "Difference-in-Differences Hedonics," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(8), pages 2385-2414.
    15. Daniel H. Karney & Khyati Malik, 2024. "The WTP-WTA Gap for Public Goods: New Insights from Compensating and Equivalent Variation Closed-Form Solutions," Papers 2401.15493, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2024.
    16. V. Smith & George Van Houtven, 2004. "Recovering Hicksian Consumer Surplus within a Collective Model: Hausman's Method for the Household," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 28(2), pages 153-167, June.
    17. Smith, V. Kerry & Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2007. "Quality adjusted price indexes and the Willig condition," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 94(1), pages 43-48, January.
    18. Evans, Keith Shannon, 2011. "Problems of uncertainty, learning, and welfare measurement in resource and environmental economics," ISU General Staff Papers 201101010800001072, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    19. Phaneuf, Daniel J. & Smith, V. Kerry, 2006. "Recreation Demand Models," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 671-761, Elsevier.
    20. David G. Brown, 2008. "Preference-Theoretic Weak Complementarity: Getting More with Less," Departmental Working Papers 2008-09, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    21. von Haefen, Roger H., 2007. "Empirical strategies for incorporating weak complementarity into consumer demand models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 15-31, July.

    More about this item

    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:oup:ajagec:v:86:y:2004:i:2:p:455-466. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.