Abstract
AbstractThis paper presents a simple computational procedure for determining a consumer's willingness to pay to have a price stabilization policy implemented. Numerical simulations are then provided which demonstrate that the commonly used expected surplus measures (whether Hicksian or Marshallian) can in fact seriously misstate the true benefits of price stabilization. These simulations also illustrate the extent to which the results may be dependent upon the assumptions made—implicitly or explicitly—regarding the consumer's attitudes toward risk, thereby underscoring the need to conduct sensitivity analyses to determine the robustness of cost‐benefit assessments with respect to these assumptions.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
