Attribute Causality in Environmental Choice Modelling

When selecting attributes in environmentalChoice Modelling studies, preference should begiven to those attributes that aredemand-relevant, policy-relevant, andmeasurable. The use of these criteria willoften result in a short list of environmentalattributes of which some are causally related. The inclusion of attributes that have a``cause-effect'' relationship may stimulate somerespondents to seek to understand the causalrelations among attributes in order to assigngreater meaning to the alternatives, andpotentially, simplify the decision makingprocess. This may have implications for theweights they assign to each of the attributeswhen identifying the preferred alternatives,and subsequently for the implicit prices and/orwelfare estimates. A test of the impact ofincluding an attribute that causesimpacts on ecosystem health as well as anattribute relating to ecosystem health effectson parameter estimates, implicitprices and welfare estimates is conducted. Twoquestionnaires are developed, one with the`causal' attribute included and one without. Acomparison of results indicates that when the`causal' attribute is included in the vector ofchoice attributes, the implicit value of asingle endangered species falls by 34 per centwhilst no significant difference is detected inthe parameter estimates. Importantly, however,estimates of compensating surplus for a givenpolicy package do not differsignificantly across the two treatments. Thisimplies that to the extent that the inclusionof a `causal' attribute reduces the implicitprices for one or more of the `effect'attributes, the associated loss in utility isapproximately offset by the utility nowassociated with the new attribute.

[1]  J. Herriges,et al.  The Performance of Nested Logit Models When Welfare Estimation is the Goal , 1997 .

[2]  M. Ben-Akiva,et al.  The demand for local telephone service: a fully discrete model of residential calling patterns and service choices , 1987 .

[3]  J. Louviere,et al.  Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation , 1998 .

[4]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation , 1996 .

[5]  Gregory L. Poe,et al.  Measuring the Difference in Mean Willingness to Pay When Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Responses Are Not Independent , 1997 .

[6]  K. Train.  Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences Over People , 1998 .

[7]  K. Lancaster,et al.  Modern Consumer Theory , 1991 .

[8]  Robin M. Hogarth,et al.  A Theory of Diagnostic Inference: Judging Causality. , 1983 .

[9]  Jeffrey Bennett,et al.  Choice Modelling, Non-Use Values and Benefit Transfer , 2000 .

[10]  J. Hausman.  Specification tests in econometrics , 1978 .

[11]  Daniel McFadden,et al.  Modelling the Choice of Residential Location , 1977 .

[12]  D. McFadden,et al.  Specification tests for the multinomial logit model , 1984 .

[13]  H. Kelley.  Causal schemata and the attribution process , 1972 .

[14]  Ross L Chapman,et al.  Choice modelling: assessing the environmental values of water supply options , 1999 .

[15]  N. Hanley,et al.  Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment , 1998 .

[16]  F. Heider.  The psychology of interpersonal relations , 1958 .

[17]  W. Hanemann.  Applied Welfare Analysis with Qualitative Response Models , 1982 .

[18]  A. Karlqvist,et al.  Spatial interaction theory and planning models , 1978 .

[19]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  A sequential approach to exploiting the combined strengths of SP and RP data: Application to freight shipper choice , 1994 .

[20]  J. Louviere,et al.  Choice Modelling and Tests of Benefit Transfer 1 , 1998 .

[21]  Elizabeth C. Hirschman,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[22]  Klaus Jonas,et al.  Introduction to Social Psychology , 2001 .

[23]  Ki-Hong Choi,et al.  Generalized extreme value model and additively separable generator function , 1997 .

[24]  G. E. Berrios,et al.  . New York: Cambridge , 2000 .

[25]  C. Kling,et al.  The Implications of Model Specification for Welfare Estimation in Nested Logit Models , 1996 .

[26]  Carlos F. Daganzo,et al.  Technical Note - Two Properties of the Nested Logit Model , 1993, Transp. Sci..

[27]  J. Richard Eiser,et al.  Cognitive social psychology : a guidebook to theory and research , 1980 .

[28]  Mark D. Uncles,et al.  Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand , 1987 .

[29]  J. Louviere,et al.  The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models , 1993 .

[30]  Gregory L. Poe,et al.  Implementing the Convolutions Approach: A Companion to "Measuring the Difference (X-Y) of Simulated Distributions: A Convolutions Approach" , 1994 .

[31]  J. Bennett,et al.  The choice modelling approach to environmental valuation , 2001 .

[32]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Prediction, Diagnosis, and Causal Thinking in Forecasting , 1982 .