Files
Abstract
Experimental auction and discrete choice experiment are two popular value elicitation methods.
Theoretically they should yield the same results but empirical results have been mixed (e.g.,
Lusk and Schroeder 2004, 2006; Corrigan et al. 2010.) This study uses both methods to
determine consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for rice with improved insect control and for
rice stored using Integrated Pest Management (IPM).
This study investigates two potential reasons – anchoring and information – for why some
studies have found apparent inconsistencies between auction and choice experiment results.
Results indicate that consumers’ WTP derived in the auction and choice experiments are
significantly different. Consumers’ average bids in the auction are higher than their willingness
to pay calculated from the choice experiments. Further, anchoring in the choice experiment
appears to be an explanation for the discrepancy. Providing consumers with more product
information help consumers behave more consistent in terms of having same preference ranking
for different rice samples in the auction and the choice experiments, but their average does not
substantially affect the discrepancy.