IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jotrge/v18y2010i2p259-265.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimation of option and non-use values for intercity passenger rail services

Author

Listed:
  • Chang, Justin S.

Abstract

This paper considers option and non-use values of intercity passenger rail services in Korea. The total economic value of a given transport service can be classified into use, option and non-use values, but other grouping rules can be applied, respectively. The use value is the consumer’s surplus from the actual ride of a specific mode. The option value, on the other hand, can be defined as a traveller’s willingness to pay for reserving a travel mode, which is not his or her main choice, as a standby alternative. Finally, the non-use value represents benefits that are not attributable to the actual use or option use, but to the vicarious, altruistic, functional and existing worth of a transport service. A random stated preference survey based on a double-bounded dichotomous choice is conducted. A survival model is applied to the data collected. Calculations are based on trip makers’ willingness to pay for option and non-use values, using the parameters of the estimated survival model. Some concluding remarks are also presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Chang, Justin S., 2010. "Estimation of option and non-use values for intercity passenger rail services," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 259-265.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jotrge:v:18:y:2010:i:2:p:259-265
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.06.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692309000933
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.06.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roberto Roson, 2001. "Assessing the Option Value of a Publicly Provided Service: The Case of Local Transport," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 38(8), pages 1319-1327, July.
    2. Michael Hanemann & John Loomis & Barbara Kanninen, 1991. "Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1255-1263.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xun Zheng & Tomio Miwa, 2019. "A Comparative Analysis on Residents’ Reservation Willingness for Bus Service Based on Option Price," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, January.
    2. Sharav, Nir & Givoni, Moshe & Shiftan, Yoram, 2019. "What transit service does the periphery need? A case study of Israel’s rural country," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 320-333.
    3. Jørgensen, Finn & Mathisen, Terje Andreas & Larsen, Berner, 2011. "Evaluating transport user benefits and social surplus in a transport market--The case of the Norwegian ferries," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 76-84, January.
    4. del Mar Parra López, María & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2022. "The added value of having multiple options to travel to. An explorative study," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    5. Lee, Sunghoon & Burris, Mark W., 2018. "Estimating the Option Value of managed lanes," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 28-36.
    6. Borhan, Muhamad Nazri & Ibrahim, Ahmad Nazrul Hakimi & Miskeen, Manssour A. Abdulasalm, 2019. "Extending the theory of planned behaviour to predict the intention to take the new high-speed rail for intercity travel in Libya: Assessment of the influence of novelty seeking, trust and external inf," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 373-384.
    7. Justin Chang & Soo Cho & Beom Lee & Yonghwan Kim & Suk Yun, 2012. "A dichotomous choice survey for quantifying option and non-use values of bus services in Korea," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 33-54, January.
    8. Drevs, Florian & Tscheulin, Dieter K. & Lindenmeier, Jörg & Renner, Simone, 2014. "Crowding-in or crowding out: An empirical analysis on the effect of subsidies on individual willingness-to-pay for public transportation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 250-261.
    9. Isabelle Nicolaï & Rémy Le Boennec, 2018. "Smart mobility providing smart cities," Post-Print halshs-01794612, HAL.
    10. Börjesson, Maria & Fung, Chau Man & Proost, Stef, 2020. "How rural is too rural for transit? Optimal transit subsidies and supply in rural areas," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rashmita Basu, 2013. "Willingness-to-pay to prevent Alzheimer’s disease: a contingent valuation approach," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 233-245, December.
    2. Alhassan, Mustapha & Gustafson, Christopher R. & Schoengold, Karina, 2017. "Effects of Information Framing on Smallholder Irrigation Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Groundwater Protection: The Case of Vea Irrigation Scheme in Ghana," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258432, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Verbic, Miroslav & Slabe-Erker, Renata, 2009. "An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: A case study of the Volcji Potok landscape area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1316-1328, March.
    4. Omar Galárraga & Sandra Sosa-Rubí & César Infante & Paul Gertler & Stefano Bertozzi, 2014. "Willingness-to-accept reductions in HIV risks: conditional economic incentives in Mexico," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(1), pages 41-55, January.
    5. Carmelo León & Francisco Vázquez-Polo & Roberto González, 2003. "Elicitation of Expert Opinion in Benefit Transfer of Environmental Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(2), pages 199-210, October.
    6. Franz Hackl & Gerald J. Pruckner, 2005. "Warm glow, free‐riding and vehicle neutrality in a health‐related contingent valuation study," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 293-306, March.
    7. Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. & Aiew, Wipon & Woodward, Richard T., 2004. "Willingness to Pay for Irradiated Food: A Non Hypothetical Market Experiment," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24995, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Railey, Ashley F. & Marsh, Thomas L., 2017. "Diagnostic Testing and Vaccine Matching: FMD in Tanzania," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258386, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    10. Loureiro, Maria L. & Loomis, John B. & Nahuelhual, Laura, 2004. "A comparison of a parametric and a non-parametric method to value a non-rejectable public good," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 61-74, September.
    11. Waranan Tantiwat & Christopher Gan & Wei Yang, 2021. "The Estimation of the Willingness to Pay for Air-Quality Improvement in Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    12. Abay Asfaw & Joachim Braun, 2005. "Innovations in Health Care Financing: New Evidence on the Prospect of Community Health Insurance Schemes in the Rural Areas of Ethiopia," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 241-253, September.
    13. McNair, Ben J. & Hensher, David A. & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Modelling heterogeneity in response behaviour towards a sequence of discrete choice questions: a latent class approach," MPRA Paper 23427, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Kiprop, Jonah Kipsaat, 2015. "An Evaluation Of Farmers Willingness To Pay For Irrigation Water In Kerio Valley Basin Kenya," Research Theses 265580, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    15. Ian Langford & Ian Bateman & Hugh Langford, 1996. "A multilevel modelling approach to triple-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(3), pages 197-211, April.
    16. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Siikamki, Juha, 2001. "Valuing Benefits of Finnish Forest Biodiversity Conservation: Fixed and Random Parameter Logit Models for Pooled Contingent Valuation and Contingent Rating/Ranking Survey Data," Western Region Archives 321696, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    18. Hermine Vedogbeton & Robert J. Johnston, 2020. "Commodity Consistent Meta-Analysis of Wetland Values: An Illustration for Coastal Marsh Habitat," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(4), pages 835-865, April.
    19. Hermann Donfouet & Ephias Makaudze & Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Eric Malin, 2011. "The determinants of the willingness-to-pay for community-based prepayment scheme in rural Cameroon," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 209-220, September.
    20. Burton, Anthony C. & Carson, Katherine S. & Chilton, Susan M. & Hutchinson, W. George, 2003. "An experimental investigation of explanations for inconsistencies in responses to second offers in double referenda," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 472-489, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jotrge:v:18:y:2010:i:2:p:259-265. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-transport-geography .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.