Abstract
One can easily obtain exact closed-form solutions for the compensating variation (and equivalent variation) in the presence of income effects when the policy being evaluated can be described as a change in the state of the world and one is willing to assume the policy change does not change the individual’s epsilon draw. Alternatively, if one assumes the policy changes the epsilon draw, the expectation of the compensating variation is a complicated integral, typically without a closed-form. The assumption that the policy does not affect one’s epsilon draw is common, and often reasonable, but little discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adamowicz, W.L., P.C.Boxall, J.J. Louviere, J. Swait and M Williams. (1999) Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities. In I. Bateman and K. Willis (eds) Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of Contingent Valuation Method in the U.S., E.C. and Developing Countries. Oxford University Press, 460–479
Dagsvik JK and Karlström A (2005). Compensating variation and hicksian choice probabilities in random utility models that are nonlinear in income. Rev Econ Stud 72: 57–76
Herriges JA and Kling CL (1999). Nonlinear income effects in random utility models. Rev Econ Stat 81: 62–72
McFaddenD (1999) Computingwillingness-to-pay in random utility models. In: Moore J, Riezman R, Melvin J (eds) Trade, theory and econometrics: essays in honour of John S. Chipman. Taylor and Francis Ltd, UK
Morey ER, Rowe RD and Watson M (1993). A repeated nested-logit model of Atlantic salmon fishing. Am J Agric Econ 75: 578–592
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Morey, E., Rossmann, K.G. Calculating, With Income Effects, the Compensating Variation for a State Change. Environ Resource Econ 39, 83–90 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-007-9093-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-007-9093-8