A new version of this entry is available:

Abstract (English)

In Stated Preference studies for the appraisal of environmental projects in poor countries or regions it often turns out that the stated willingness to pay of people for environmental improvements, which is used as measure of individual welfare changes, is very low. This is often interpreted as the result of extremely tight budget constraints, which make it impossible that people express their true appreciation of an environmental project in terms of their willingness to pay for it. Therefore, it is sometimes suggested to use labour contributions instead of money as a numeraire to measure utility in such studies. In this paper we show theoretically and empirically that this suggestion is not compatible with the principles of welfare theory because of several inconsistencies. We also illustrate the validity of our arguments empirically based on the results of a Contingent Valuation study conducted in a rural area in northern Vietnam.

File is subject to an embargo until

This is a correction to:

A correction to this entry is available:

This is a new version of:

Notes

Publication license

Publication series

Hohenheim discussion papers in business, economics and social sciences; 2017,03

Published in

Faculty
Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences
Institute
Institute of Economics

Examination date

Supervisor

Edition / version

Citation

DOI

ISSN

ISBN

Language
English

Publisher

Publisher place

Classification (DDC)
330 Economics

Original object

BibTeX

@techreport{Pham2017, url = {https://hohpublica.uni-hohenheim.de/handle/123456789/6123}, author = {Pham, Van Dinh and Ahlheim, Michael and Frör, Oliver et al.}, title = {Labour as a utility measure reconsidered}, year = {2017}, school = {Universität Hohenheim}, series = {Hohenheim discussion papers in business, economics and social sciences}, }