Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Preferences in the Future

  • Published:
Environmental and Resource Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Environmental economics has been much occupied with “the discount rate,” which is the value of future costs and benefits relative to present costsor benefits. But at least as important is the question of whatshould be discounted, that is, what the value of those future environmentalbenefits is to future generations. This paper analyzes the role for futurepreferences and discusses the state of knowledge. I argue that theappropriate discount rate is the market one, and that the real problemis determining future willingness-to-pay. This approach makes clearerthe connection between discounting and the valuation debate.

This paper focuses on two features that have been prominent in that debate:existence value and reference dependence. I argue that thereis a vital connection between the two constructs and that this link yieldsimportant implications for future willingness-to-pay.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arrow, K. (1999), ‘Discounting, Morality, and Gaming’, in P. Portney and J. Weyant, eds., Discounting and Intergenerational Equity. Resources for the Future.

  • Bowman, D., D. Minehart and M. Rabin (1999), ‘Loss Aversion in a Consumption-Savings Model’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 38, 155–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, D. (1999), ‘On the Uses of Benefit-Cost Reasoning in Choosing Policy toward Global Climate Change’, in P. Portney and J. Weyant, eds., Discounting and Intergenerational Equity. Resources for the Future.

  • Brekke, K. (1997), ‘The Numeraire Matters in Cost-Benefit Analysis’, Journal of Public Economics 64, 117–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, T. (1995), ‘Discounting the Future: Economics and Ethics’, Resources (Summer), 3–6.

  • Caplin, A. and J. Leahy (2001), ‘Psychology Expected Utility Theory and Anticipatory Feelings’, Quarterly Journl of Economics (February) 116, 55–80.

  • Cline, W. (1999), ‘Discounting for the Very Long Term’, in P. Portney and J. Weyant, eds., Discounting and Intergenerational Equity. Resources for the Future.

  • Cropper, M., S. Aydede and P. Portney (1994), ‘Preferences for Life Saving Programs: How the Public Discounts Time and Age’, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 8, 243–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropper, M. and D. Laibson (1999), ‘The Implications of Hyperbolic Discounting for Project Evaluation’, in P. Portney and J. Weyant, eds., Discounting and Intergenerational Equity. Resources for the Future.

  • Dasgupta, P., K.-G. Mäler and S. Barrett (1999), ‘Intergenerational Equity and Social Discount Rates’, in P. Portney and J. Weyant, eds., Discounting and Intergenerational Equity. Resources for the Future.

  • Dasgupta, P., K.-G. Mäler and S. Barrett (1994), Environmental Encyclopedia. Gale Research.

  • Flores, N. and R. Carson (1997), ‘The Relationship Between the Income Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 33, 287–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagen, D., J. Vincent and P. Welle (1992), ‘Benefits from Preserving Old-Growth Forests and the Spotted Owl’, Contemporary Policy Issues (April) X(2), 13–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, J. K. and R. Carson (1993), ‘Baseline Risk and Preference for Reductions in Risk-to-Life’, Risk Analysis 13, 457–462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, J. K., J. List and K. E. McConnell (2001), ‘The Endowment's Effect on Marginal Value’, Unpublished manuscript.

  • Horowitz, J. K. and K. E. McConnell (2001), ‘Willingness-to-Pay, Willingness-to-Accept, and the Income Effect’, Unpublished manuscript.

  • Howarth, R. (1996), ‘Climate Change and Overlapping Generations’, Contemporary Economic Policy (October) XIV, 100–111.

  • Jousten, A. (2001), ‘Life-Cycle Modeling of Bequests and Their Impact on Annuity Valuation’, Journal of Public Economics (January) 79, 149–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopp, R. and P. Portney (1999), ‘Mock Referenda for Intergenerational Decision-making’, in P. Portney and J. Weyant, eds., Discounting and Intergenerational Equity. Resources for the Future.

  • Kristrom, B. and P. Riera (1996), ‘Is the Income Elasticity of Environmental Improvements Less Than One?’, Environmental and Resource Economics (January) 7, 45–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laitner, J. and H. Ohlsson (2001), ‘Bequest Motives: A Comparison of Sweden and the United States’, Journal of Public Economics (January) 79, 205–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, R. et al. (1982), Discounting for Time and Risk in Energy Policy. Resources for the Future.

  • Loewenstein, G. (1987), ‘Anticipation and the Valuation of Delayed Consumption’, Economic Journal 97, 666–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G. and S. Frederick (1996), ‘Predicting Reactions to Environmental Change’, in M. Bazerman et al., eds., Environment, Ethics, and Behavior. New Lexington Press.

  • Loewenstein, G., T. O'Donoghue and M. Rabin (1999), ‘Projection Bias in Predicting Future Utility’, Unpublished manuscript.

  • Manne, A. (1999), ‘Equity, Efficiency, and Discounting’, in P. Portney and J. Weyant, eds., Discounting and Intergenerational Equity. Resources for the Future.

  • Markowitz, H. (1952), ‘The Utility of Wealth’, Journal of Political Economy 60, 151–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, K. E. (1997), ‘Does Altruism Undermine Existence Value?’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32, 22–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFadden, D. (1994), ‘Contingent Valuation and Social Choice’, Amer. J. Agric. Econ. 76(4), 689–708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metrick, A. and M. Weitzman (1996), ‘Endangered Species Preservation’, Land Economics (February) 72, 1–16.

  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (1999), ‘Discounting and the Treatment of Uncertainty in Natural Resource Damage Assessment’, Technical Paper 99-1, Damage Assessment Center, NOAA.

  • Patt, A. and R. Zeckhauser (2000), ‘Loss Aversion and the Valuation of Environmental Resources’, Paper presented at the ASSA Meetings, Boston.

  • Portney, P. and J. Weyant (1999), Discounting and Intergenerational Equity. Resources for the Future.

  • Rabin, M. (1998), ‘Psychology and Economics’, Journal of Economic Literature (March) 36, 11–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rollins, K. and A. Lyke (1998), ‘The Case for Diminishing Marginal Existence Values’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management (November) 36, 324–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, W. and R. Zeckhauser (1988), ‘Status Quo Bias in Decision Making’, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty (March) 1, 7–59.

  • Schelling, T. (1992), ‘Some Economics of Global Warming’, American Economic Review 82, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1991), ‘Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1039–1061.

  • Weitzman, M. (1994), ‘On the Environmental Discount Rate’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 26, 200–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weitzman, M. (1998), ‘Why the Far-Distant Future Should be Discounted at Its Lowest Possible Rate’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 36 201–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weitzman, M. (1999), ‘Just Keep Discounting But...’, in P. Portney and J. Weyant, eds., Discounting and Intergenerational Equity. Resources for the Future.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Maryland, 2200 Symons Hall, College Park, MD, 20742-5535, USA

    J.K. Horowitz

Authors
  1. J.K. Horowitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Horowitz, J. Preferences in the Future. Environmental and Resource Economics 21, 241–258 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014592629514

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014592629514

Search

Navigation