IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/inrasl/207991.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Making or buying environmental public goods: do consumers care?

Author

Listed:
  • Bougherara, Douadia
  • Costa, Sandrine
  • Teisl, Mario

Abstract

Firms may voluntary abate pollution using one of two options: internalizing its own external effects and incuring abatement costs ("making") or delegating environmental protection by purchasing offsets ("buying"). We aim to elicit consumers' WTP for producers' use of the "making" option as compared to the "buying" option, controlling for spatial effects (joint local public goods) and level of GHG emissions. Using a stated choice survey with 722 respondents, we find consumers are more willing to pay for a "making" policy. Consumers do not significantly care for the producers' use of offsets when the level of local externalities is controlled for.

Suggested Citation

  • Bougherara, Douadia & Costa, Sandrine & Teisl, Mario, 2012. "Making or buying environmental public goods: do consumers care?," Working Papers 207991, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:inrasl:207991
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.207991
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/207991/files/WP%20SMART-LERECO%2012-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.207991?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marco Costanigro & Dawn Thilmany McFadden & Stephan Kroll & Gretchen Nurse, 2011. "An in‐store valuation of local and organic apples: the role of social desirability," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(4), pages 465-477, September.
    2. Yuko Onozaka & Dawn Thilmany Mcfadden, 2011. "Does Local Labeling Complement or Compete with Other Sustainable Labels? A Conjoint Analysis of Direct and Joint Values for Fresh Produce Claim," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(3), pages 689-702.
    3. Søren Olsen, 2009. "Choosing Between Internet and Mail Survey Modes for Choice Experiment Surveys Considering Non-Market Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(4), pages 591-610, December.
    4. MacKerron, George J. & Egerton, Catrin & Gaskell, Christopher & Parpia, Aimie & Mourato, Susana, 2009. "Willingness to pay for carbon offset certification and co-benefits among (high-)flying young adults in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1372-1381, April.
    5. David Hensher & Nina Shore & Kenneth Train, 2005. "Households’ Willingness to Pay for Water Service Attributes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(4), pages 509-531, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Le Coent, Philippe & Préget, Raphaële & Thoyer, Sophie, 2017. "Compensating Environmental Losses Versus Creating Environmental Gains: Implications for Biodiversity Offsets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 120-129.
    2. Rogers, Abbie A. & Burton, Michael P., 2016. "Public preferences for the design of biodiversity offset policies in Australia," Working Papers 231533, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    3. Huth, William L. & McEvoy, David M. & Morgan, O. Ashton, 2018. "Controlling an Invasive Species through Consumption: The Case of Lionfish as an Impure Public Good," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 74-79.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Printezis, Iryna & Grebitus, Carola, 2018. "Marketing Channels for Local Food," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 161-171.
    2. Hanna Górska-Warsewicz & Sylwia Żakowska-Biemans & Dagmara Stangierska & Monika Świątkowska & Agnieszka Bobola & Julita Szlachciuk & Maksymilian Czeczotko & Karol Krajewski & Ewa Świstak, 2021. "Factors Limiting the Development of the Organic Food Sector—Perspective of Processors, Distributors, and Retailers," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-22, September.
    3. Yiwen Yang & PingSun Leung & Chu‐wei Tseng, 2022. "Price premium or price discount for locally produced food products? A 5W1H approach in meta‐analysis," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 2261-2274, September.
    4. Ying, Jiahui & Shonkwiler, Vanessa P. & Campbell, Benjamin L., 2018. "Willingness to Pay or Not to Pay: Valuing Foods Some Respondents Find Distasteful," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274065, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Grebitus, Carola & Printezis, Iryna & Printezis, Antonios, 2017. "Relationship between Consumer Behavior and Success of Urban Agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 189-200.
    6. Costanigro, Marco & Kroll, Stephan & Thilmany, Dawn D., 2012. "Local, Organic, Conventional— Asymmetric Effects of Information and Taste on Label Preferences in an Experimental Auction," 2012 AAEA/EAAE Food Environment Symposium 123199, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Menegaki, Angeliki, N. & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Tsagarakis, Konstantinos P., 2016. "Towards a common standard – A reporting checklist for web-based stated preference valuation surveys and a critique for mode surveys," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 18-50.
    8. Iryna Printezis & Carola Grebitus & Stefan Hirsch, 2019. "The price is right!? A meta-regression analysis on willingness to pay for local food," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, May.
    9. Morrissey, Karyn & Plater, Andrew & Dean, Mary, 2018. "The cost of electric power outages in the residential sector: A willingness to pay approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 141-150.
    10. Yamna Erraach & Fatma Jaafer & Ivana Radić & Mechthild Donner, 2021. "Sustainability Labels on Olive Oil: A Review on Consumer Attitudes and Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    11. Rebecca Boehm & Hannah Kitchel & Selena Ahmed & Anaya Hall & Colin M. Orians & John Richard Stepp & Al Robbat, Jr. & Timothy S. Griffin & Sean B. Cash, 2019. "Is Agricultural Emissions Mitigation on the Menu for Tea Drinkers?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-20, September.
    12. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2010. "Restricted versus unrestricted choice in labelled choice experiments: exploring the tradeoffs of expanding choice dimensions," Research Reports 95072, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    13. Kelvin Balcombe & Michail Bitzios & Iain Fraser & Janet Haddock-Fraser, 2014. "Using Attribute Importance Rankings Within Discrete Choice Experiments: An Application to Valuing Bread Attributes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(2), pages 446-462, June.
    14. Farsi, Mehdi, 2010. "Risk aversion and willingness to pay for energy efficient systems in rental apartments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 3078-3088, June.
    15. Clevo Wilson & Wasantha Athukorala & Benno Torgler & Robert Gifford & Maria A. Garcia-Valiñas & Shunsuke Managi, 2021. "Willingness to pay to ensure a continuous water supply with minimum restrictions," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(3), pages 1519-1537, September.
    16. Adelina Gshwandtner & Cheul Jang & Richard McManus, 2017. "Improving Drinking Quality in South Korea: A Choice Experiment," Studies in Economics 1720, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    17. Ulf Liebe & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Volkmar Hartje, 2012. "Test–Retest Reliability of Choice Experiments in Environmental Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(3), pages 389-407, November.
    18. Steiner, B.E. & Peschel, A.O. & Grebitus, C., 2017. "Multi-Product Category Choices Labeled for Ecological Footprints: Exploring Psychographics and Evolved Psychological Biases for Characterizing Latent Consumer Classes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 251-264.
    19. Jennifer Porter & David Conner & Jane Kolodinsky & Amy Trubek, 2017. "Get real: an analysis of student preference for real food," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 921-932, December.
    20. Rambonilaza, Tina & Kerouaz, Fathallah, 2023. "Valuing harvest regulation changes in recreational fisheries with a discrete choice experiment study: What can we learn from a synthetic review?," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 40-54.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    JEL classification:

    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    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:ags:inrasl:207991. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inrapfr.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.