{"title":"科学概率预测的模糊性和为减缓气候变化政策付费的意愿","authors":"Masahide Watanabe , Toshio Fujimi","doi":"10.1016/j.rie.2022.09.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We estimate a smooth ambiguity preference function, wherein an individual faces multiple probability predictions of policy outcomes, and then empirically measure their willingness-to-pay for the policy, ambiguity attitude, and ambiguity premium. Climate change mitigation policy is used as the example. The estimation results reveal that most people have ambiguity-seeking attitudes, but that these attitudes are heterogeneous across individuals. People who are older, are university graduates, have higher income, or trust more in science show stronger ambiguity-seeking attitudes. Their willingness-to-pay can be underestimated if ambiguity is not considered. Moreover, individuals with stronger ambiguity-seeking attitudes support aggressive mitigation policies more strongly. Our estimation strategy is generally applicable to policy evaluations wherein policy outcomes are ambiguous.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46094,"journal":{"name":"Research in Economics","volume":"76 4","pages":"Pages 386-402"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ambiguity of scientific probability predictions and willingness-to-pay for climate change mitigation policies\",\"authors\":\"Masahide Watanabe , Toshio Fujimi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rie.2022.09.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We estimate a smooth ambiguity preference function, wherein an individual faces multiple probability predictions of policy outcomes, and then empirically measure their willingness-to-pay for the policy, ambiguity attitude, and ambiguity premium. Climate change mitigation policy is used as the example. The estimation results reveal that most people have ambiguity-seeking attitudes, but that these attitudes are heterogeneous across individuals. People who are older, are university graduates, have higher income, or trust more in science show stronger ambiguity-seeking attitudes. Their willingness-to-pay can be underestimated if ambiguity is not considered. Moreover, individuals with stronger ambiguity-seeking attitudes support aggressive mitigation policies more strongly. Our estimation strategy is generally applicable to policy evaluations wherein policy outcomes are ambiguous.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in Economics\",\"volume\":\"76 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 386-402\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090944322000539\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090944322000539","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Ambiguity of scientific probability predictions and willingness-to-pay for climate change mitigation policies
We estimate a smooth ambiguity preference function, wherein an individual faces multiple probability predictions of policy outcomes, and then empirically measure their willingness-to-pay for the policy, ambiguity attitude, and ambiguity premium. Climate change mitigation policy is used as the example. The estimation results reveal that most people have ambiguity-seeking attitudes, but that these attitudes are heterogeneous across individuals. People who are older, are university graduates, have higher income, or trust more in science show stronger ambiguity-seeking attitudes. Their willingness-to-pay can be underestimated if ambiguity is not considered. Moreover, individuals with stronger ambiguity-seeking attitudes support aggressive mitigation policies more strongly. Our estimation strategy is generally applicable to policy evaluations wherein policy outcomes are ambiguous.
期刊介绍:
Established in 1947, Research in Economics is one of the oldest general-interest economics journals in the world and the main one among those based in Italy. The purpose of the journal is to select original theoretical and empirical articles that will have high impact on the debate in the social sciences; since 1947, it has published important research contributions on a wide range of topics. A summary of our editorial policy is this: the editors make a preliminary assessment of whether the results of a paper, if correct, are worth publishing. If so one of the associate editors reviews the paper: from the reviewer we expect to learn if the paper is understandable and coherent and - within reasonable bounds - the results are correct. We believe that long lags in publication and multiple demands for revision simply slow scientific progress. Our goal is to provide you a definitive answer within one month of submission. We give the editors one week to judge the overall contribution and if acceptable send your paper to an associate editor. We expect the associate editor to provide a more detailed evaluation within three weeks so that the editors can make a final decision before the month expires. In the (rare) case of a revision we allow four months and in the case of conditional acceptance we allow two months to submit the final version. In both cases we expect a cover letter explaining how you met the requirements. For conditional acceptance the editors will verify that the requirements were met. In the case of revision the original associate editor will do so. If the revision cannot be at least conditionally accepted it is rejected: there is no second revision.