Comparing experimental auctions and real choice experiments in food choice: a homegrown and induced value analysis

IF 3.3 2区 经济学 Q2 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY
Vincenzina Caputo, Angelos Lagoudakis, Robert Shupp, Claudia Bazzani
{"title":"Comparing experimental auctions and real choice experiments in food choice: a homegrown and induced value analysis","authors":"Vincenzina Caputo, Angelos Lagoudakis, Robert Shupp, Claudia Bazzani","doi":"10.1093/erae/jbad033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study compares a real choice experiment (RCE) with three commonly used experimental auction (EA) mechanisms (Becker–DeGroot–Marschak, random nth price auction (RNPA), second price auction (SPA)) to determine whether willingness to pay (WTP) estimates differ across these elicitation methods. We use quality labels on eggs as the empirical application and find that the SPA, RNPA and RCE yield similar WTP estimates, while the BDM mechanism generally produces higher WTP estimates. We also compare these EAs and the RCE in an induced value setting and find that the BDM auction produces greater deviations from the underlying value than the other EAs and RCE. We suggest that RCEs may be preferable to BDMs for collecting WTP estimates in logistically difficult experimental settings.","PeriodicalId":50476,"journal":{"name":"European Review of Agricultural Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Review of Agricultural Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbad033","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study compares a real choice experiment (RCE) with three commonly used experimental auction (EA) mechanisms (Becker–DeGroot–Marschak, random nth price auction (RNPA), second price auction (SPA)) to determine whether willingness to pay (WTP) estimates differ across these elicitation methods. We use quality labels on eggs as the empirical application and find that the SPA, RNPA and RCE yield similar WTP estimates, while the BDM mechanism generally produces higher WTP estimates. We also compare these EAs and the RCE in an induced value setting and find that the BDM auction produces greater deviations from the underlying value than the other EAs and RCE. We suggest that RCEs may be preferable to BDMs for collecting WTP estimates in logistically difficult experimental settings.
食品选择中的实验拍卖和真实选择实验的比较:本土和诱导价值分析
本研究将真实选择实验(RCE)与三种常用的实验拍卖(EA)机制(Becker–DeGroot–Marschak、随机第n价格拍卖(RNPA)和第二价格拍卖(SPA))进行了比较,以确定这些启发方法的支付意愿(WTP)估计值是否不同。我们使用鸡蛋的质量标签作为实证应用,发现SPA、RNPA和RCE产生相似的WTP估计,而BDM机制通常产生更高的WTP估算。我们还比较了这些EA和诱导价值设置中的RCE,发现BDM拍卖比其他EA和RCE产生了更大的偏离基本价值的偏差。我们认为,在逻辑困难的实验环境中,RCE可能比BDM更适合收集WTP估计值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Review of Agricultural Economics
European Review of Agricultural Economics 管理科学-农业经济与政策
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
25
审稿时长
>24 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Review of Agricultural Economics serves as a forum for innovative theoretical and applied agricultural economics research. The ERAE strives for balanced coverage of economic issues within the broad subject matter of agricultural and food production, consumption and trade, rural development, and resource use and conservation. Topics of specific interest include multiple roles of agriculture; trade and development; industrial organisation of the food sector; institutional dynamics; consumer behaviour; sustainable resource use; bioenergy; agricultural, agri-environmental and rural policy; specific European issues. Methodological articles are welcome. All published papers are at least double peer reviewed and must show originality and innovation. The ERAE also publishes book reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信