Casey Wichman
Associate Professor
Overview
Dr. Casey Wichman is an applied microeconomist working on issues at the intersection of environmental and public economics. His research focuses on how people interact with the natural and built environment, and what that behavior reveals about the value of environmental amenities. Dr. Wichman's research spans water and energy demand management, climate change impacts and policy, valuation of environmental resources and infrastructure, urban transportation, public good provision, and outdoor recreation.
Prior to joining Georgia Tech, Dr. Wichman served as the Research Director of the Energy and Environment Lab at the University of Chicago and as a Fellow at Resources for the Future, an environmental economics think-tank in Washington, DC. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Maryland in 2015, and his doctoral work earned outstanding doctoral dissertation awards from both the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists and the Association of Agricultural and Applied Economists.
- Ph.D., University of Maryland
- M.S., University of Maryland
- M.S., North Carolina State University
- B.A., Ithaca College
Interests
- Applied Econometrics
- Environmental Economics
- Public Economics
Courses
- ECON-2100: Economics and Policy
- ECON-4210: The Economics of Climate Change
- ECON-4803: Econ of Climate Change:
- ECON-7102: Environmental Economics I
Publications
Selected Publications
Journal Articles
- Cost misperception and voting for public goods
In: American Journal of Agricultural Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2024
Public good provision is often determined through referendums by voters, who weigh benefits against costs. However, perceptions of benefits and costs may be incorrect, which could in turn lead to voter error and misallocation of public goods. Using real-world referendums, we evaluate voter perceptions of the private costs of providing public goods by conducting three exit polls of New England voters and an online survey of California voters. By comparing cost perceptions to actual tax incidence, we find pervasive evidence that voters misperceive costs. Fewer than 20% of voters in our samples reported perceived costs within 25% of estimated actual costs. These findings are unsurprising given the ubiquity of opaque language explaining the financial consequences of public good referendums. In addition, our analysis suggests that actual costs have no statistical bearing on voter choice, but at least in the New England sample, voter approval is affected by perceived costs. Thus, a substantial proportion of voters are making decisions based in part on inaccurate costs, which in some cases lead to people voting against their preferences and potential misallocation of public funds. Further, researchers who match voter approval with estimated actual cost are unlikely to obtain accurate cost responsiveness or valuation estimates.
- Smart thermostats, automation, and time-varying prices
In: American Economic Journal: Applied Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2024
- Social media influences National Park visitation
In: Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2024
- Notching for free: Do cyclists reveal the opportunity cost of time?
In: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2023
- Preheating Prosocial Behaviour
In: Economic Journal [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2023
- RCTs against the machine: Can machine learning prediction methods recover experimental treatment effects?
In: Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2023
- Valuing Nonmarket Impacts of Climate Change on Recreation: From Reduced Form to Welfare
In: Environmental and Resource Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2022
- Water Affordability in the United States
In: Water Resources Research [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2022
- Clustered into control: Heterogeneous causal impacts of water infrastructure failure
In: Economic Inquiry [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2021
- What Should We Be Teaching Students about the Economics of Climate Change: Is There a Consensus?
In: International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2021
- Climate Change and Recreation: Evidence from North American Cycling
In: Environmental and Resource Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2020
- Elasticities and the Inverse Hyperbolic Sine Transformation
In: Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2020
- Bicycle infrastructure and traffic congestion: Evidence from DC's Capital Bikeshare
In: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2018
- Does water scarcity shift the electricity generation mix toward fossil fuels? Empirical evidence from the United States
In: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2018
- Information provision and consumer behavior: A natural experiment in billing frequency
In: Journal of Public Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2017
- Conservation policies: Who responds to price and who responds to prescription?
In: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2016
- Incentives, green preferences, and private provision of impure public goods
In: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2016
- Perceived price in residential water demand: Evidence from a natural experiment
In: Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2014
All Publications
Journal Articles
- Cost misperception and voting for public goods
In: American Journal of Agricultural Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2024
Public good provision is often determined through referendums by voters, who weigh benefits against costs. However, perceptions of benefits and costs may be incorrect, which could in turn lead to voter error and misallocation of public goods. Using real-world referendums, we evaluate voter perceptions of the private costs of providing public goods by conducting three exit polls of New England voters and an online survey of California voters. By comparing cost perceptions to actual tax incidence, we find pervasive evidence that voters misperceive costs. Fewer than 20% of voters in our samples reported perceived costs within 25% of estimated actual costs. These findings are unsurprising given the ubiquity of opaque language explaining the financial consequences of public good referendums. In addition, our analysis suggests that actual costs have no statistical bearing on voter choice, but at least in the New England sample, voter approval is affected by perceived costs. Thus, a substantial proportion of voters are making decisions based in part on inaccurate costs, which in some cases lead to people voting against their preferences and potential misallocation of public funds. Further, researchers who match voter approval with estimated actual cost are unlikely to obtain accurate cost responsiveness or valuation estimates.
- Smart thermostats, automation, and time-varying prices
In: American Economic Journal: Applied Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2024
- Social media influences National Park visitation
In: Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2024
- Notching for free: Do cyclists reveal the opportunity cost of time?
In: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2023
- Preheating Prosocial Behaviour
In: Economic Journal [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2023
- RCTs against the machine: Can machine learning prediction methods recover experimental treatment effects?
In: Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2023
- Valuing Nonmarket Impacts of Climate Change on Recreation: From Reduced Form to Welfare
In: Environmental and Resource Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2022
- Water Affordability in the United States
In: Water Resources Research [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2022
- Clustered into control: Heterogeneous causal impacts of water infrastructure failure
In: Economic Inquiry [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2021
- What Should We Be Teaching Students about the Economics of Climate Change: Is There a Consensus?
In: International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2021
- Climate Change and Recreation: Evidence from North American Cycling
In: Environmental and Resource Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2020
- Elasticities and the Inverse Hyperbolic Sine Transformation
In: Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2020
- Bicycle infrastructure and traffic congestion: Evidence from DC's Capital Bikeshare
In: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2018
- Does water scarcity shift the electricity generation mix toward fossil fuels? Empirical evidence from the United States
In: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2018
- Interpreting nonlinear semi-elasticities in reduced-form climate damage estimation
In: Climatic Change [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2018
- A cautionary tale on using panel data estimators to measure program impacts
In: Economics Letters [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2017
- Information provision and consumer behavior: A natural experiment in billing frequency
In: Journal of Public Economics [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2017
- Conservation policies: Who responds to price and who responds to prescription?
In: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2016
- Incentives, green preferences, and private provision of impure public goods
In: Journal of Environmental Economics and Management [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2016
- Perceived price in residential water demand: Evidence from a natural experiment
In: Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization [Peer Reviewed]
Date: 2014