Decision-makers tend to prefer the first alternative over subsequent alternatives which is called the primacy effect. To reliably measure this effect, we conducted an experiment with real consequences for preference statements. Therefore, we elicit preferences of subjects using a rating scale, i.e. hypothetical preferences, and willingness to pay, i.e. real preferences, for two sequences of pain. Within these sequences, both overall intensity and duration of pain are identical. Hence, a rational decision-maker should be indifferent, whereas the primacy effect predicts a stronger preference for the first sequence. What we see is a primacy effect only for hypothetical preferences. This effect vanishes for real preferences.
The research aimed at investigating the factors affecting consumers’ willingness to pay for chicken meat from biosecure farms. The research was conducted in Makassar City, South Sulawesi Province, Indonesia. Samples were taken using random sampling technique in two supermarkets namely Lotte Mart and Gelael. Total samples were 50 respondents which comprised the chicken meat consumers. To find out the consumers’ willingness to pay for chicken meat from the biosecure farms, the contingent valuation method was utilized. Data were collected through interviews and questionnaires. Probit Logistic was estimated to examine the factors affecting the consumers’ willingness to pay for at the premium price for chicken meat from the biosecure farms. The research indicates that the education and income affect significantly the consumers’ willingness to pay for chicken meat from the biosecure farms (P < 0.05). The results of the study will be beneficial for the policy makers, producers, consumers and those conducting research.
We present results from experimental price-setting oligopolies in which green firms undertake different levels of energy-saving investments motivated by public subsidies and demand-side advantages. We find that consumers reveal higher willingness to pay for greener sellers’ products. This observation in conjunction to the fact that greener sellers set higher prices is compatible with the use and interpretation of energy-saving behaviour as a differentiation strategy. However, sellers do not exploit the resulting advantage through sufficiently high price-cost margins, because they seem trapped into “run to stay still” competition. Regarding the use of public subsidies to energy-saving sellers we uncover an undesirable crowding-out effect of consumers’ intrinsic tendency to support green manufacturers. Namely, consumers may be less willing to support a green seller whose energy-saving strategy entails a direct financial benefit. Finally, we disentangle two alternative motivations for consumer’s attractions to pro-social firms; first, the self-interested recognition of the firm’s contribution to the public and private welfare and, second, the need to compensate a firm for the cost entailed in each pro-social action. Our results show the prevalence of the former over the latter.
The main purpose of this research is the calculation of implicit prices of the environmental level of air quality in the city of Moscow on the basis of housing property prices. The database used contains records of approximately 20 thousand apartments and has been provided by a leading real estate agency operating in Russia. The explanatory variables include physical characteristics of the houses, environmental (industry emissions), neighbourhood sociodemographic and geographic data: GPS coordinates of each house. The hedonic regression results for ecological variables show «negative» prices while increasing the level of air contamination from such substances as carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, and particles (CO, NO2, SO2, TSP). The marginal willingness to pay for higher environmental quality is presented for linear and log-log models.