Consumer Willingness to Pay for Vehicle Attributes: What Do We Know?

As standards for vehicle greenhouse gas emissions and fuel economy have become more stringent, concerns have arisen that the incorporation of fuel-saving technologies may entail tradeoffs with other vehicle attributes important to consumers such as acceleration performance. Assessing the effects of these tradeoffs on consumer welfare requires estimates of both the degree of the tradeoffs, and consumer willingness to pay (WTP) for the foregone benefits. This paper has two objectives. The first is to review recent literature that presents, or can be used to calculate, marginal WTP (MWTP) for vehicle attributes to describe the attributes that have been studied and the estimated MWTP values. We found 52 U.S.-focused papers with sufficient data to calculate WTP values for 142 different vehicle attributes, which we organized into 15 general groups of comfort, fuel availability, fuel costs, fuel type, incentives, model availability, non-fuel operating costs, performance, pollution, prestige, range, reliability, safety, size, and vehicle type. Measures of dispersion around central MWTP values typically show large variation in MWTP values for attributes. We explore factors that may contribute to this large variation via analysis of variance (ANOVA) and find that, although most have statistically significant effects, they account for only about one third of the observed variation. Case studies of papers that provide estimates from a variety of model formulations and estimation methods suggest that decisions made by researchers can strongly influence MWTP estimates. The papers second objective is to seek consensus estimates for WTP for fuel cost reduction and increased acceleration performance. Meta-analysis of MWTP for reduced fuel cost indicates that estimates based on revealed vs. stated preference data differ, as do estimates from models that account for endogeneity and those that do not. We find greater consistency in estimates of MWTP for acceleration despite substantial uncertainty about the overall mean. We conclude with recommendations for improving the understanding of consumers MWTP for vehicle attributes

Simpler is Better: Predicting Consumer Vehicle Purchases in the Short Run

When agencies such as the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establish future greenhouse gas emissions standards for new vehicles, forecasting future vehicle purchases due to changes in fuel economy and prices provides insight into regulatory impacts. We compare predictions from a nested logit model independently developed for US EPA to a simple model where past market share predicts future market share using data from model years 2008, 2010, and 2016. The simple model outperforms the nested logit model for all goodness-of-prediction measures for both prediction years. Including changes in vehicle price and fuel economy increases bias in forecasted market shares. This bias suggests price increases are correlated with unobserved increases in vehicle quality, changes in preferences, or brand-specific changes in market size but not cost pass-through. For 2010, past shares predict better than a nested logit model despite a major shock, the economic disruption caused by the Great Recession. Observed share changes during this turbulent period may offer upper bounds for policy changes in other contexts: the largest observed change in market share across the two horizons is 6.6% for manufacturers in 2016 and 3.4% for an individual vehicle in 2010

The Economics of Native Plants in Residential Landscape Designs

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/50426/1/HelfandParknassauer06.pd

The General Equilibrium Incidence of Environmental Mandates

Pollution regulations affect factor demands, relative returns, production, and output prices. In our model, one sector includes pollution as an input that can be a complement or substitute for labor or capital. For each type of mandate, we find conditions where more burden is on labor or on capital. Stricter regulation does not always place less burden on the better substitute for pollution. Also, restrictions on pollution per unit output create an “output-subsidy effect” on factor prices that can reverse the usual output and substitution effects. We find analogous effects for a restriction on pollution per unit capital

The Effects on Production and Profits of Different Pollution Control Standards

Five different specifications of a pollution control restriction are analyzed for their comparative effects on input use, output, and profits. Because of the different effects, interest groups are likely to pressure politicians for their preferred outcomes. The politically optimal regulatory instrument may then not correspond to the efficient instrument

Letter: Consider the Consumer Side of the Market for Catastrophe Insurance

Gloria Helfand argues that consumer misperception of risk or the availability of disaster relief may reduce consumer participation in a catastrophe insurance market.