Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation

This paper provides the latest research developments in the method of choice experiments applied to valuation of non-market goods. Choice experiments, along with the, by now, well-known contingent valuation method, are very important tools for valuing non-market goods and the results are used in both cost-benefit analyses and litigations related to damage assessments. The paper should provide the reader with both the means to carry out a choice experiment and to conduct a detailed critical analysis of its performance in order to give informed advice about the results. A discussion of the underlying economic model of choice experiments is incorporated, as well as a presentation of econometric models consistent with economic theory. Furthermore, a detailed discussion on the development of a choice experiment is provided, which in particular focuses on the design of the experiment and tests of validity. Finally, a discussion on different ways to calculate welfare effects is presented.

[1]  Wiebke Kuklys,et al.  Stated choice methods: analysis and application, Jordan J. Louviere, David A. Hensher and Joffre D. Swait, Cambridge University Press, ISBN: 0-521-78830-7 , 2002 .

[2]  Barbara Kanninen,et al.  Optimal Design for Multinomial Choice Experiments , 2002 .

[3]  Ian J. Bateman,et al.  Valuing Environmental Preferences , 2001 .

[4]  Peter Martinsson,et al.  Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment , 2001 .

[5]  Richard T. Carson,et al.  Incentive and informational properties of preference questions , 2007 .

[6]  D. McFadden,et al.  MIXED MNL MODELS FOR DISCRETE RESPONSE , 2000 .

[7]  M. Buxton,et al.  Preference measurement using conjoint methods: an empirical investigation of reliability. , 2000, Health economics.

[8]  F. Johnson,et al.  Willingness to pay for improved respiratory and cardiovascular health: a multiple-format, stated-preference approach. , 2000, Health economics.

[9]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  A test of policy labels in environmental choice modelling studies , 2000 .

[10]  K. Train,et al.  Mixed Logit with Repeated Choices: Households' Choices of Appliance Efficiency Level , 1998, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[11]  K. Train,et al.  Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns , 1998 .

[12]  A. Scott,et al.  Agency in health care. Examining patients' preferences for attributes of the doctor-patient relationship. , 1998, Journal of health economics.

[13]  S. Cosslett,et al.  Environmental Quality Preference and Benefit Estimation in Multinomial Probit Models: A Simulation Approach , 1998 .

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

[15]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Introduction to Attribute-Based Stated Choice Methods , 1998 .

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

[17]  P. Frykblom,et al.  Hypothetical Question Modes and Real Willingness to Pay , 1997 .

[18]  M Ryan,et al.  Using conjoint analysis to assess women's preferences for miscarriage management. , 1997, Health economics.

[19]  C. Bhat.  Covariance heterogeneity in nested logit models: Econometric structure and application to intercity travel , 1997 .

[20]  J Polak,et al.  USING STATED-PREFERENCE METHODS TO EXAMINE TRAVELLER PREFERENCES AND RESPONSES , 1997 .

[21]  E. Morey.  TWO RUMs unCLOAKED : Nested-Logit Models of Site Choice and Nested-Logit Models of Participation and Site Choice , 1997 .

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

[23]  Joel Huber,et al.  The Importance of Utility Balance in Efficient Choice Designs , 1996 .

[24]  Daniel McFadden,et al.  Computing Willingness-to-Pay in Random Utility Models , 1996 .

[25]  W. Hanemann,et al.  Welfare Analysis with Discrete Choice Models , 1996 .

[26]  Joel Huber,et al.  A General Method for Constructing Efficient Choice Designs , 1996 .

[27]  Joffre Swait,et al.  The Effect of Choice Environment and Task Demands on Consumer Behavior: Discriminating Between Contribution and Confusion , 1996 .

[28]  W. Michael Hanemann,et al.  THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF DISCRETE-RESPONSE CV DATA , 1996 .

[29]  Daniel L. Rubinfeld,et al.  Contingent Valuation and Revealed Preference Methodologies : Comparing the Estimates for Quasi-Public Goods , 1997 .

[30]  C. Bhat.  A heteroscedastic extreme value model of intercity travel mode choice , 1995 .

[31]  R. G. Cummings,et al.  Homegrown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous Choice Approach Incentive-Compatible? , 1995 .

[32]  Marisa J. Mazzotta,et al.  Decision Making When Choices Are Complex: A Test of Heiner's Hypothesis , 1995 .

[33]  J. Hausman,et al.  Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number? , 1994 .

[34]  W. Michael Hanemann,et al.  Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation , 1994 .

[35]  Mark J. Garratt,et al.  Efficient Experimental Design with Marketing Research Applications , 1994 .

[36]  John P. Georges,et al.  Optimal sophisticated voting strategies in single ballot elections involving three candidates , 1993 .

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

[38]  Edward R. Morey,et al.  A Repeated Nested-Logit Model of Atlantic Salmon Fishing , 1993 .

[39]  Barbara Kanninen,et al.  Optimal Experimental Design for Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation , 1993 .

[40]  John W. Payne,et al.  Where Do the Numbers Come From? How People Respond to Contingent Valuation Questions , 1993 .

[41]  J. Louviere,et al.  Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities , 1994 .

[42]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction , 1992 .

[43]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  Analysis of the reliability of preference ranking data , 1991 .

[44]  Catherine L. Kling,et al.  Estimating the Precision of Welfare Measures , 1991 .

[45]  Richard T. Carson,et al.  Experimental analysis of choice , 1991 .

[46]  David A. Patterson,et al.  Inference and Optimal Design for a Welfare Measure in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation , 1991 .

[47]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  Estimation of travel demand models from multiple data sources , 1990 .

[48]  J. Andreoni.  Giving with Impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian Equivalence , 1989, Journal of Political Economy.

[49]  M. Bradley,et al.  REALISM AND ADAPTATION IN DESIGNING HYPOTHETICAL TRAVEL CHOICE CONCEPTS , 1988 .

[50]  Mark Wardman,et al.  A COMPARISON OF REVEALED PREFERENCE AND STATED PREFERENCE MODELS OF TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR , 1988 .

[51]  M. Uncles.  Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand , 1987 .

[52]  I. Krinsky,et al.  On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities , 1986 .

[53]  Moshe Ben-Akiva,et al.  Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand , 1985 .

[54]  John O. Summers,et al.  Reliability and Validity of Conjoint Analysis and Self-Explicated Weights: A Comparison , 1984 .

[55]  W. Hanemann.  Discrete-Continuous Models of Consumer Demand , 1984 .

[56]  Lalita Sen,et al.  COMPARISON OF THE PREDICTIVE ABILITY OF FOUR MULTIATTRIBUTE APPROACHES TO ATTITUDINAL MEASUREMENT , 1982 .

[57]  Dodo J. Thampapillai,et al.  Environmental Economics , 2019 .

[58]  D. McFadden.  Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

[59]  K. Lancaster.  A New Approach to Consumer Theory , 1966, Journal of Political Economy.

[60]  S. Ciriacy-Wantrup,et al.  Capital Returns from Soil-Conservation Practices , 1947 .