David J. Bjornstad

A Learning Design for Reducing Hypothetical Bias in the Contingent Valuation Method

Over the last few years a great deal of research has focussed on hypothetical bias in value estimates obtained with the contingent valuation (CV) method and on means for ameliorating if not eliminating such bias. To date, efforts to eliminate hypothetical bias have relied on calibration techniques or on word-smithing of one kind or another to induce subjects to provide responses to hypothetical questions that mimic responses made by subjects facing actual payments in the valuation experiment. This paper introduces a different approach for eliminating hypothetical bias. A design for a CV survey format is presented which provides subjects with the opportunity to “learn” how the CV institution works. Sequential referenda are conducted where respondents gain experience in CV settings by participating in both hypothetical and real referenda. The logic of this Learning Design is a straightforward application of the trials process used in experimental economics. We demonstrate that the Learning Design is effective in eliminating hypothetical bias in surveys concerning donations to two different public goods.

Why would anyone object? An exploration of social aspects of phytoremediation acceptability

Referee: Mr. Peter Siebach, Environmental Engineer, U.S. Department of Energy, Chicago Operations Office, 9800 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439 Phytoremediation comprises a suite of promising cleanup technologies that use plants to remove or contain contaminants in soil and water. To be deployed, phytoremediation must be both technically and socially acceptable. This article explores the potential social acceptability of phytoremediation options proposed for use at specific sites and describes the conceptual framework that guides our exploration. The framework, called PACT (Public Acceptability of Controversial Technologies), consists of Dialog, Technology, Constituent, and Context dimensions. It posits that remediation decision making is a social process informed by scientific and technical information, rather than a science- or technology-driven process. Although empirical data are scarce, applying PACT shows that a number of issues have the potential to impose conditions on the social acceptability of phytoremediation, and that some issues could lead to outright rejection. Further, because many of these issues concern values and goals, they cannot be resolved simply by providing better or more detailed technical information about phytoremediation. PACT is instructive in showing how even seemingly benign or desirable technologies such as phytoremediation have the potential to generate public controversy, delineating issues in ways that can help lead to their resolution.

A Framework for Analyzing Dialogues over the Acceptability of Controversial Technologies

This article asks under what circumstances controversial technologies would be considered seriously for remediation instead of being rejected out of hand. To address this question, the authors developed a conceptual framework called public acceptability of controversial technologies (PACT). PACT considers site-specific, decision-oriented dialogues among the individuals and groups involved in selecting or recommending hazardous waste remediation technologies. It distinguishes technology acceptability, that is, a willingness to consider seriously, from technology acceptance, the decision to deploy. The framework integrates four dimensions: (1) an acceptability continuum that underlies decision-oriented dialogues among individuals and constituency groups, (2) the attributes of these individuals and groups, (3) the attributes of the technology at issue, and (4) the community context—social, institutional, and physical. This article describes and explores PACT as a tool for understanding and better predicting the acceptability of controversial technologies.

Specificity and Engagement: Increasing ELSI’s Relevance to Nano–Scientists

Scholars studying the ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) associated with emerging technologies maintain the importance of considering these issues throughout the research and development cycle, even during the earliest stages of basic research. Embedding these considerations within the scientific process requires communication between ELSI scholars and the community of physical scientists who are conducting that basic research. We posit that this communication can be effective on a broad scale only if it links societal issues directly to characteristics of the emerging technology that are relevant to the physical and natural scientists involved in research and development. In this article, we examine nano-ELSI literature from 2003 to 2010 to discern the degree to which it makes these types of explicit connections. We find that, while the literature identifies a wide range of issues of societal concern, it generally does so in a non-specific manner. It neither links societal issues to particular forms or characteristics of widely divergent nanotechnologies nor to any of the many potential uses to which those nanotechnologies may be put. We believe that these kinds of specificity are essential to those engaged in nano-scale research. We also compare the literature-based findings to observations from interviews we conducted with nanoscientists and conclude that ELSI scholars should add technical- and application-related forms of specificity to their work and their writings to enhance effectiveness and impact in communicating with one important target audience—members of the nanoscale science community.

Patent Pools as a Solution to Efficient Licensing of Complementary Patents? Some Experimental Evidence

Production requiring licensing groups of complementary patents implements a coordination game among patent holders, who can price patents by choosing among combinations of fixed and royalty fees. Summed across patents, these fees become the total producer cost of the package of patents. Royalties, because they function as excise taxes, add to marginal costs, resulting in higher prices and reduced quantities of the downstream product and lower payoffs to the patent holders. Using fixed fees eliminates this inefficiency but yields a more complex coordination game in which there are multiple equilibria, which are very fragile in that small mistakes can lead the downstream firm to not license the technology, resulting in inefficient outcomes. We report on a laboratory market investigation of the efficiency effects of coordinated pricing of patents in a patent pool. We find that pool‐like pricing agreements can yield fewer coordination failures in the pricing of complementary patents.

The consequences of alternative environmental management goals: A non-linear programming analysis of nuclear weapons legacy clean-up at Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Prioritization of projects within the U.S. Department of Energys (DOE) Weapons Complex Clean-up Program, exemplified with data from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, is quite sensitive to overall goals. Non-linear programming analysis of three alternative goals - mortgage reduction, terminal-period risk minimization, and current-period risk minimization - shows substantial differences in waste treated, risk reduced, and cost over a ten-year period.

An estimate of the potential market for equipment to produce biomass fuels for on-farm use.

Abstract This paper examines the potential U.S. market for equipment to produce fuels from biomass on farms or in cooperatives for on-farm use. Penetration of on-farm biomass fuel production into the agricultural energy market depends upon: the demands for different fuels in various regions of the country, reflecting different crops and operations; the availability of crops and other feedstocks in each of these regions; the availability of conversion technologies; and the relative cost to farmers of purchasing fuels and producing them locally. Using a linear programming model, we estimate that agriculture in each of four regions could supply its own energy demands from on-farm biomass conversion, although this resul would require processing of large shares of some feedstocks in some regions. This information yields estimates of the size of the conversion equipment market. Realization of this market would require large increases in the prices paid for enery from commercial sources, however.

Profit, productivity, and profit-sharing

This study is an investigation of the effect of profit-sharing on labor productivity. When monitoring labor performance is costly for management, a regular wage/salary contract is insufficient to induce profit-maximizing behavior from the worker. The authors demonstrate that when this profit-maximizing behavior can be induced only through profit-sharing, a linear profit-sharing program will increase productivity and the welfare of both management and labor. The benefit from profit-sharing is increasing up to the point where the utility of additional income is offset by the negative utility of extraordinary effort (working harder or providing higher quality work). The income effect, i.e., the change in negative utility of extraordinary effort given a change in income, can potentially either increase or decrease the point at which the income-effort tradeoff-reaches zero.

Chapter 8 – “It's Like Dj-Vu, All Over Again”: Anticipating Societal Responses to Nanotechnologies

Publisher Summary This chapter highlights a trans-disciplinary science that allows analyzing societal responses to new and evolving technologies. This trans-disciplinary science would seek to organize the understanding of societal responses within and across technologies more systematically and comprehensively than now is possible. Perhaps more importantly, it would begin to fill the enormous gap in the ability to anticipate societal responses to a range of technologies. On the one hand, the sense of deja-vu in thinking about societal responses to varied technologies leads to posit that at least some of what seems so familiar can be formalized into generalized principles. This issue is non-trivial, particularly given evidence that even the most controversial technologies—nuclear facilities, genetically engineered organisms, incinerators—do not evoke uniform societal responses conceptually, when applied at particular locations, or over time. The main reason for understanding and anticipating societal responses to new and emerging technologies is to contribute to better, and better-informed, decisions. At its simplest, “better” means that the decisions halt or minimize adverse impacts of technologies and their applications and accommodate the development and application of technologies that can produce substantial societal benefits. Not all new or emerging technologies “should” be adopted if they fail to produce net societal benefits, however those benefits are gauged. At the same time, it can be jarring to consider what might have been, had societal discomfort stifled the discovery of the double helix or the development of such transformative technologies as computers or cell phones.

It's like déjà-vu, all over again : anticipating societal responses to nanotechnologies

Publisher Summary This chapter highlights a trans-disciplinary science that allows analyzing societal responses to new and evolving technologies. This trans-disciplinary science would seek to organize the understanding of societal responses within and across technologies more systematically and comprehensively than now is possible. Perhaps more importantly, it would begin to fill the enormous gap in the ability to anticipate societal responses to a range of technologies. On the one hand, the sense of deja-vu in thinking about societal responses to varied technologies leads to posit that at least some of what seems so familiar can be formalized into generalized principles. This issue is non-trivial, particularly given evidence that even the most controversial technologies—nuclear facilities, genetically engineered organisms, incinerators—do not evoke uniform societal responses conceptually, when applied at particular locations, or over time. The main reason for understanding and anticipating societal responses to new and emerging technologies is to contribute to better, and better-informed, decisions. At its simplest, “better” means that the decisions halt or minimize adverse impacts of technologies and their applications and accommodate the development and application of technologies that can produce substantial societal benefits. Not all new or emerging technologies “should” be adopted if they fail to produce net societal benefits, however those benefits are gauged. At the same time, it can be jarring to consider what might have been, had societal discomfort stifled the discovery of the double helix or the development of such transformative technologies as computers or cell phones.