IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04474880.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Valuing insurance against small probability risks: A meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Selim Mankaï

    (IAE - UCA - Institut d'Administration des Entreprises - Clermont-Auvergne - UCA - Université Clermont Auvergne, UCA - Université Clermont Auvergne)

  • Sébastien Marchand

    (CERDI - Centre d'Études et de Recherches sur le Développement International - IRD - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UCA - Université Clermont Auvergne, UCA - Université Clermont Auvergne)

  • Ngoc Ha Le

    (UCA - Université Clermont Auvergne)

Abstract

The demand for voluntary insurance against low-probability, high-impact risks is lower than expected. To assess the magnitude of the demand, we conduct a meta-analysis of contingent valuation studies using a dataset of experimentally elicited and survey-based estimates. We find that the average stated willingness to pay (WTP) for insurance is 87% of expected losses. We perform a meta-regression analysis to examine the heterogeneity in aggregate WTP across these studies. The meta-regression reveals that information about loss probability and probability levels positively influence relative willingness to pay, whereas respondents' average income and age have a negative effect. Moreover, we identify cultural sub-factors, such as power distance and uncertainty avoidance, that provided additional explanations for differences in WTP across international samples. Methodological factors related to the sampling and data collection process significantly influence the stated WTP. Our results, robust to model specification and publication bias, are relevant to current debates on stated preferences for low-probability risks management.

Suggested Citation

  • Selim Mankaï & Sébastien Marchand & Ngoc Ha Le, 2024. "Valuing insurance against small probability risks: A meta-analysis," Post-Print hal-04474880, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04474880
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2024.102181
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04474880
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04474880/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2024.102181?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. Hofstetter, Reto & Miller, Klaus M. & Krohmer, Harley & Zhang, Z. John, 2021. "A de-biased direct question approach to measuring consumers' willingness to pay," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 70-84.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:3:p:316-331 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Kunreuther, Howard & Novemsky, Nathan & Kahneman, Daniel, 2001. "Making Low Probabilities Useful," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 103-120, September.
    4. Josef C. Brada & Zdenek Drabek & Ichiro Iwasaki, 2021. "Does Investor Protection Increase Foreign Direct Investment? A Meta‐Analysis," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 34-70, February.
    5. Mark Browne & Christian Knoller & Andreas Richter, 2015. "Behavioral bias and the demand for bicycle and flood insurance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 141-160, April.
    6. Aurélien Baillon & Aleli Kraft & Owen O’Donnell & Kim Wilgenburg, 2022. "A behavioral decomposition of willingness to pay for health insurance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 64(1), pages 43-87, February.
    7. Edward Balistreri & Gary McClelland & Gregory Poe & William Schulze, 2001. "Can Hypothetical Questions Reveal True Values? A Laboratory Comparison of Dichotomous Choice and Open-Ended Contingent Values with Auction Values," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 18(3), pages 275-292, March.
    8. Browne, Mark J & Hoyt, Robert E, 2000. "The Demand for Flood Insurance: Empirical Evidence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 291-306, May.
    9. Cole, Shawn & Fernando, A. Nilesh & Stein, Daniel & Tobacman, Jeremy, 2020. "Field comparisons of incentive-compatible preference elicitation techniques," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 33-56.
    10. Christopher G. Leggett & Naomi S. Kleckner & Kevin J. Boyle & John W. Dufield & Robert Cameron Mitchell, 2003. "Social Desirability Bias in Contingent Valuation Surveys Administered Through In-Person Interviews," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(4), pages 561-575.
    11. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    12. Pitthan, Francisco & De Witte, Kristof, 2021. "Puzzles of insurance demand and its biases: A survey on the role of behavioural biases and financial literacy on insurance demand," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(C).
    13. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    14. Levon Barseghyan & Francesca Molinari & Ted O'Donoghue & Joshua C. Teitelbaum, 2018. "Estimating Risk Preferences in the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(2), pages 501-564, June.
    15. Kunreuther, Howard, 2021. "Improving the National Flood Insurance Program," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 318-332, July.
    16. Kunreuther, Howard & Slovic, Paul, 1978. "Economics, Psychology, and Protective Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(2), pages 64-69, May.
    17. Wakker, P.P. & Thaler, R.H. & Tversky, A., 1997. "Probabilistic insurance," Other publications TiSEM 7532d1e7-187b-4418-95a1-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Anja Zimmer & Helmut Gründl & Christian D. Schade & Franca Glenzer, 2018. "An Incentive†Compatible Experiment on Probabilistic Insurance and Implications for an Insurer's Solvency Level," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 85(1), pages 245-273, March.
    19. Alicia Entem & Patrick Lloyd‐Smith & Wiktor ( Vic) L. Adamowicz & Peter C. Boxall, 2022. "Using inferred valuation to quantify survey and social desirability bias in stated preference research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(4), pages 1224-1242, August.
    20. Evžen Kočenda & Ichiro Iwasaki, 2022. "Bank survival around the world: A meta‐analytic review," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 108-156, February.
    21. T. D. Stanley, 2008. "Meta‐Regression Methods for Detecting and Estimating Empirical Effects in the Presence of Publication Selection," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(1), pages 103-127, February.
    22. Park, Sojung Carol & Lemaire, Jean, 2012. "The Impact of Culture on the Demand for Non-Life Insurance," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(2), pages 501-527, November.
    23. Petraud, Jean & Boucher, Stephen & Carter, Michael, 2015. "Competing theories of risk preferences and the demand for crop insurance: Experimental evidence from Peru," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211383, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    24. Wakker, Peter P & Thaler, Richard H & Tversky, Amos, 1997. "Probabilistic Insurance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 7-28, October.
    25. Kesternich, Iris & Heiss, Florian & McFadden, Daniel & Winter, Joachim, 2013. "Suit the action to the word, the word to the action: Hypothetical choices and real decisions in Medicare Part D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1313-1324.
    26. Biener, Christian & Landmann, Andreas & Santana, Maria Isabel, 2019. "Contract nonperformance risk and uncertainty in insurance markets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 65-83.
    27. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    28. Botzen, W.J.W. & van den Bergh, J.C.J.M., 2012. "Risk attitudes to low-probability climate change risks: WTP for flood insurance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 151-166.
    29. Franziska Voelckner, 2006. "An empirical comparison of methods for measuring consumers’ willingness to pay," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 137-149, April.
    30. Neves, Pedro Cunha & Sequeira, Tiago Neves, 2018. "Spillovers in the production of knowledge: A meta-regression analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 750-767.
    31. Yu Yan & Michael Faure, 2021. "Government interventions in microinsurance: evidence from China," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 46(3), pages 440-467, July.
    32. Jose Miguel Abito & Yuval Salant, 2019. "The Effect of Product Misperception on Economic Outcomes: Evidence from the Extended Warranty Market," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(6), pages 2285-2318.
    33. Theo S. Eicher & Chris Papageorgiou & Adrian E. Raftery, 2011. "Default priors and predictive performance in Bayesian model averaging, with application to growth determinants," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(1), pages 30-55, January/F.
    34. Welsh, Michael P. & Poe, Gregory L., 1998. "Elicitation Effects in Contingent Valuation: Comparisons to a Multiple Bounded Discrete Choice Approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 170-185, September.
    35. Ugur, Mehmet & Trushin, Eshref & Solomon, Edna & Guidi, Francesco, 2016. "R&D and productivity in OECD firms and industries: A hierarchical meta-regression analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2069-2086.
    36. Ehrlich, Isaac & Becker, Gary S, 1972. "Market Insurance, Self-Insurance, and Self-Protection," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(4), pages 623-648, July-Aug..
    37. Xindong Xue & Mingmei Cheng & Wangyongxin Zhang, 2021. "Does Education Really Improve Health? A Meta‐Analysis," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 71-105, February.
    38. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    39. Lusk, Jayson L. & Norwood, F. Bailey, 2009. "Bridging the gap between laboratory experiments and naturally occurring markets: An inferred valuation method," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 236-250, September.
    40. Jayson L. Lusk & Ted C. Schroeder, 2004. "Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 467-482.
    41. Howard Kunreuther & Mark Pauly, 2004. "Neglecting Disaster: Why Don't People Insure Against Large Losses?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 5-21, January.
    42. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:3:p:237-245 is not listed on IDEAS
    43. Johannes G. Jaspersen & Richard Peter & Marc A. Ragin, 2023. "Probability weighting and insurance demand in a unified framework," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 48(1), pages 63-109, March.
    44. Andy C W Chui & Chuck C Y Kwok, 2008. "National culture and life insurance consumption," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 39(1), pages 88-101, January.
    45. John P. A. Ioannidis & T. D. Stanley & Hristos Doucouliagos, 2017. "The Power of Bias in Economics Research," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 236-265, October.
    46. MOSSIN, Jan, 1968. "Aspects of rational insurance purchasing," LIDAM Reprints CORE 23, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    47. Thomas C. Brown & Patricia A. Champ & Richard C. Bishop & Daniel W. McCollum, 1996. "Which Response Format Reveals the Truth about Donations to a Public Good?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(2), pages 152-166.
    48. Fredrik Carlsson & Jorge García & Åsa Löfgren, 2010. "Conformity and the Demand for Environmental Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 407-421, November.
    49. Chloe H. Lucas & Kate I. Booth & Carolina Garcia, 2021. "Insuring homes against extreme weather events: a systematic review of the research," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(3), pages 1-21, April.
    50. Justin Gallagher, 2014. "Learning about an Infrequent Event: Evidence from Flood Insurance Take-Up in the United States," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 206-233, July.
    51. Helga Fehr-Duda & Ernst Fehr, 2016. "Sustainability: Game human nature," Nature, Nature, vol. 530(7591), pages 413-415, February.
    52. Andreas Friedl & Katharina Lima de Miranda & Ulrich Schmidt, 2014. "Insurance demand and social comparison: An experimental analysis," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 97-109, April.
    53. Jonas Schmidt & Tammo H. A. Bijmolt, 2020. "Accurately measuring willingness to pay for consumer goods: a meta-analysis of the hypothetical bias," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 499-518, May.
    54. Glenn W. Harrison & Jia Min Ng, 2019. "Behavioral insurance and economic theory: A literature review," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 22(2), pages 133-182, July.
    55. Platteau, Jean-Philippe & De Bock, Ombeline & Gelade, Wouter, 2017. "The Demand for Microinsurance: A Literature Review," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 139-156.
    56. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    57. Richard C. Ready & Jean C. Buzby & Dayuan Hu, 1996. "Differences between Continuous and Discrete Contingent Value Estimates," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(3), pages 397-411.
    58. Leblois, A. & Le Cotty, T. & Maître d'Hôtel, E., 2020. "How Might Climate Change Influence farmers' Demand for Index-Based Insurance?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    59. Jon Nelson & Peter Kennedy, 2009. "The Use (and Abuse) of Meta-Analysis in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: An Assessment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 42(3), pages 345-377, March.
    60. Johannes G. Jaspersen, 2016. "Hypothetical Surveys And Experimental Studies Of Insurance Demand: A Review," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 83(1), pages 217-255, January.
    61. Piers Steel & Sjoerd Beugelsdijk & Herman Aguinis, 2021. "The anatomy of an award-winning meta-analysis: Recommendations for authors, reviewers, and readers of meta-analytic reviews," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(1), pages 23-44, February.
    62. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    63. Peter John Robinson & W. J. Wouter Botzen, 2019. "Determinants of Probability Neglect and Risk Attitudes for Disaster Risk: An Online Experimental Study of Flood Insurance Demand among Homeowners," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(11), pages 2514-2527, November.
    64. Michael Norton & Daniel Osgood & Malgosia Madajewicz & Eric Holthaus & Nicole Peterson & Rahel Diro & Conner Mullally & Tse-Ling Teh & Mengesha Gebremichael, 2014. "Evidence of Demand for Index Insurance: Experimental Games and Commercial Transactions in Ethiopia," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(5), pages 630-648, May.
    65. Brouwer, Roy & Tinh, Bui Duc & Tuan, Tran Huu & Magnussen, Kristin & Navrud, Ståle, 2014. "Modeling demand for catastrophic flood risk insurance in coastal zones in Vietnam using choice experiments," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 228-249, April.
    66. Paul Hudson & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Jeffrey Czajkowski & Heidi Kreibich, 2017. "Moral Hazard in Natural Disaster Insurance Markets: Empirical Evidence from Germany and the United States," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 93(2), pages 179-208.
    67. Justin Sydnor, 2010. "(Over)insuring Modest Risks," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 177-199, October.
    68. Hanemann, W Michael, 1991. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 635-647, June.
    69. Michal W. Krawczyk & Stefan T. Trautmann & Gijs Kuilen, 2017. "Catastrophic risk: social influences on insurance decisions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(3), pages 309-326, March.
    70. John Loomis, 2011. "What'S To Know About Hypothetical Bias In Stated Preference Valuation Studies?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 363-370, April.
    71. Jan V. Hansen & Rasmus H. Jacobsen & Morten I. Lau, 2016. "Willingness To Pay For Insurance In Denmark," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 83(1), pages 49-76, January.
    72. Harrison, Glenn W. & Rutström, E. Elisabet, 2008. "Experimental Evidence on the Existence of Hypothetical Bias in Value Elicitation Methods," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 81, pages 752-767, Elsevier.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Johannes G. Jaspersen & Richard Peter & Marc A. Ragin, 2023. "Probability weighting and insurance demand in a unified framework," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 48(1), pages 63-109, March.
    2. Peter, Richard & Ying, Jie, 2020. "Do you trust your insurer? Ambiguity about contract nonperformance and optimal insurance demand," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 938-954.
    3. Glenn W. Harrison & Jia Min Ng, 2019. "Behavioral insurance and economic theory: A literature review," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 22(2), pages 133-182, July.
    4. Leblois, A. & Le Cotty, T. & Maître d'Hôtel, E., 2020. "How Might Climate Change Influence farmers' Demand for Index-Based Insurance?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    5. Marc A. Ragin & Benjamin L. Collier & Johannes G. Jaspersen, 2021. "The effect of information disclosure on demand for high‐load insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 88(1), pages 161-193, March.
    6. Aurélien Baillon & Owen O'Donnell & Stella Quimbo & Kim van Wilgenburg, 2022. "Do time preferences explain low health insurance take‐up?," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 89(4), pages 951-983, December.
    7. Paul Raschky & Reimund Schwarze & Manijeh Schwindt & Ferdinand Zahn, 2013. "Uncertainty of Governmental Relief and the Crowding out of Flood Insurance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 54(2), pages 179-200, February.
    8. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    9. Aurélien Baillon & Aleli Kraft & Owen O’Donnell & Kim Wilgenburg, 2022. "A behavioral decomposition of willingness to pay for health insurance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 64(1), pages 43-87, February.
    10. Glenn W. Harrison & Jia Min Ng, 2018. "Welfare effects of insurance contract non-performance," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 43(1), pages 39-76, May.
    11. Peter John Robinson & W. J. Wouter Botzen, 2019. "Determinants of Probability Neglect and Risk Attitudes for Disaster Risk: An Online Experimental Study of Flood Insurance Demand among Homeowners," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(11), pages 2514-2527, November.
    12. Shogren, Jason F., 2006. "Experimental Methods and Valuation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 969-1027, Elsevier.
    13. Kunal Rajesh Lahoti & Shivani Hanji & Pratik Kamble & Kavita Vemuri, 2023. "Impact of Loss-Framing and Risk Attitudes on Insurance Purchase: Insights from a Game-like Interface Study," Papers 2310.13300, arXiv.org.
    14. Mark Browne & Christian Knoller & Andreas Richter, 2015. "Behavioral bias and the demand for bicycle and flood insurance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 141-160, April.
    15. Hofstetter, Reto & Miller, Klaus M. & Krohmer, Harley & Zhang, Z. John, 2021. "A de-biased direct question approach to measuring consumers' willingness to pay," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 70-84.
    16. Hwang, In Do, 2021. "Prospect theory and insurance demand: Empirical evidence on the role of loss aversion," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    17. Hwang, In Do, 2024. "Behavioral aspects of household portfolio choice: Effects of loss aversion on life insurance uptake and savings," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 89(PA), pages 1029-1053.
    18. Oerlemans, Leon A.G. & Chan, Kai-Ying & Volschenk, Jako, 2016. "Willingness to pay for green electricity: A review of the contingent valuation literature and its sources of error," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 875-885.
    19. Andrew Royal, 2017. "Dynamics in risk taking with a low-probability hazard," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 41-69, August.
    20. Botzen, W.J. Wouter & de Boer, Joop & Terpstra, Teun, 2013. "Framing of risk and preferences for annual and multi-year flood insurance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 357-375.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Low probability risks; Contingent valuation; Insurance demand; Stated preferences method; Metaanalysis; Economic experiments;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • G22 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Insurance; Insurance Companies; Actuarial Studies
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:journl:hal-04474880. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.