Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by
Crossref.
Hellerstein, Daniel
and
Higgins, Nathaniel
2010.
The Effective Use of Limited Information: Do Bid Maximums Reduce Procurement Cost in Asymmetric Auctions?.
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review,
Vol. 39,
Issue. 2,
p.
288.
Messer, Kent D.
and
Murphy, James J.
2010.
Special Issue on Experimental Methods in Environmental, Natural Resource, and Agricultural Economics.
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review,
Vol. 39,
Issue. 2,
p.
iii.
DePiper, Geret S.
Higgins, Nathaniel
Lipton, Douglas W.
and
Stocking, Andrew
2013.
Auction Design, Incentives, and Buying Back Maryland and Virginia Crab Licenses.
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie,
Vol. 61,
Issue. 2,
p.
353.
Conte, Marc N.
and
Griffin, Robert M.
2017.
Quality Information and Procurement Auction Outcomes: Evidence from a Payment for Ecosystem Services Laboratory Experiment.
American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
Vol. 99,
Issue. 3,
p.
571.
Messer, Kent D.
Duke, Joshua M.
Lynch, Lori
and
Li, Tongzhe
2017.
When Does Public Information Undermine the Efficiency of Reverse Auctions for the Purchase of Ecosystem Services?.
Ecological Economics,
Vol. 134,
Issue. ,
p.
212.
Wu, JunJie
and
Yu, Jialing
2017.
Efficiency‐Equity Tradeoffs in Targeting Payments for Ecosystem Services.
American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
Vol. 99,
Issue. 4,
p.
894.
Hellerstein, Daniel M.
2017.
The US Conservation Reserve Program: The evolution of an enrollment mechanism.
Land Use Policy,
Vol. 63,
Issue. ,
p.
601.
Boxall, Peter C.
Perger, Orsolya
Packman, Katherine
and
Weber, Marian
2017.
An experimental examination of target based conservation auctions.
Land Use Policy,
Vol. 63,
Issue. ,
p.
592.
Banerjee, Simanti
and
Conte, Marc N.
2018.
Information Access, Conservation Practice Choice, and Rent Seeking in Conservation Procurement Auctions: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment.
American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
Vol. 100,
Issue. 5,
p.
1407.
Conte, Marc N.
and
Griffin, Robert
2019.
Private Benefits of Conservation and Procurement Auction Performance.
Environmental and Resource Economics,
Vol. 73,
Issue. 3,
p.
759.
Kim, Yoomi
and
Cho, Seong-Hoon
2019.
How spatial targeting of incentive payments for forest carbon storage can be adjusted for competing land uses.
Regional Environmental Change,
Vol. 19,
Issue. 2,
p.
441.
Rosch, Stephanie
Raszap Skorbiansky, Sharon
Weigel, Collin
Messer, Kent D.
and
Hellerstein, Daniel
2021.
Barriers to Using Economic Experiments in Evidence‐Based Agricultural Policymaking.
Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy,
Vol. 43,
Issue. 2,
p.
531.
Shortle, James
Ollikainen, Markku
and
Iho, Antti
2021.
Water Quality and Agriculture.
p.
319.
Cramton, Peter
Hellerstein, Daniel
Higgins, Nathaniel
Iovanna, Richard
López-Vargas, Kristian
and
Wallander, Steven
2021.
Improving the cost-effectiveness of the Conservation Reserve Program: A laboratory study.
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,
Vol. 108,
Issue. ,
p.
102439.
Palm-Forster, Leah H.
and
Messer, Kent D.
2021.
Vol. 5,
Issue. ,
p.
4331.
Kindu, Mengistie
Mai, Trang Le Ngoc
Bingham, Logan Robert
Borges, José G.
Abildtrup, Jens
and
Knoke, Thomas
2022.
Auctioning approaches for ecosystem services – Evidence and applications.
Science of The Total Environment,
Vol. 853,
Issue. ,
p.
158534.
Glebe, Thilo W.
2022.
The influence of contract length on the performance of sequential conservation auctions.
American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
Vol. 104,
Issue. 2,
p.
739.