Skip Navigation



Review of Environmental Economics and Policy Advance Access published online on February 27, 2008
Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, doi:10.1093/reep/rem027
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
2/1/26    most recent
rem027v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shogren, J. F.
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, L. O.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

On Behavioral-Environmental Economics

Jason F. Shogren* and Laura O. Taylor**

* Shogren is the Stroock Professor of Natural Resource Conservation and Management, Department of Economics and Finance, University of Wyoming, and the King Carl XVI Gustaf Professor of Environmental Sciences, Umeå University
** Taylor is Professor, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, and Director, Center for Environmental and Resource Economic Policy, North Carolina State University

E-mail: JRamses{at}uwyo.edu

Traditional environmental and resource economics uses rational choice theory to guide the evaluation of alternative policy options to correct market failure. Behavioral economics, however, has challenged this conventional mindset by showing how people frequently make choices and state values that deviate from the presumption of rationality, i.e., behavioral failures. This article explores the potential of behavioral economics to advance the science of environmental and resource economics. We address four questions: (1) How can behavioral failures affect thinking about environmental policy? (2) When are behavioral failures relevant to the science of environmental economics? (3) Is behavioral failure just another form of market failure? (4) Do we have a new behavioral-environmental second best problem? We conclude that the evidence from behavioral economics remains insufficient to support the wholesale rejection of rational choice theory within environmental and resource economics. But this does not mean anomalous behavior is non-existent; nature's goods and services frequently lack the active market-like arbitrage needed to encourage consistent and rational choice. We believe it is crucial to identify the economic circumstances, institutional designs, and social contexts in which rational choice theory works and those where it fails to capture observed behavior.

JEL Classification: Q5, C9

Shogren thanks the Norwegian University of Life Sciences, GREQAM, and the University of Paris I-Sorbonne for their hospitality. This review draws from many discussions over the years with our colleagues: thanks to T. Cherry, T. Crocker, P. Ferraro, G. Hollard, T. Hurley, D. Hayes, G. Harrison, N. Hanley, B. Kriström, S. Kroll, S. Luchini, G. Parkhurst, C. Plott, E. Romstad, V. K. Smith, and V. L. Smith.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Rev Environ Econ PolicyHome page
T. Tietenberg
Reflections--Energy Efficiency Policy: Pipe Dream or Pipeline to the Future?
Rev Environ Econ Policy, June 11, 2009; (2009) rep004v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.