Abstract
Most normative economics assumes that individuals have coherent preferences. This paper responds to growing evidence of failures of this assumption, particularly in the context of stated-preference methods widely used in environmental policy analysis. It proposes a non-paternalistic concept of consumer sovereignty that does not assume preference coherence, is satisfied by competitive markets, and can be applied to the provision of public goods. A key implication is that decisions should reflect valuations revealed ‘at the point of consumption’. Such valuations, which can be inferred from hedonic prices, may be less susceptible to willingness-to-accept (WTA)/willingness-to-pay (WTP) disparities than those elicited by stated-preference methods.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 87-103 |
| Number of pages | 17 |
| Journal | Journal of Environmental Economics and Management |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Jan 2009 |
Keywords
- Market simulation
- Public goods
- Paternalism
- Environmental evaluation