Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Would You Choose Your Preferred Option? Comparing Choice and Recoded Ranking Experiments

Contents:

Author Info

  • Alejandro Caparr�s
  • José L. Oviedo
  • Pablo Campos

Abstract

Previous research has shown that results from a choice experiment are statistically different from those obtained from a ranking experiment that is recoded and treated as a choice experiment using only the first rank. By avoiding some of the shortcomings of previous comparisons, we obtain the opposite results using data from the valuation of a cork oak reforestation program in the south of Spain. Structural models and welfare estimations are statistically indistinguishable irrespective of the use of parametric or bootstrapping tests. Further, we employ follow-up questions and subsample analysis to test whether divergences appear when potential effects are isolated. Copyright 2008, Oxford University Press.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-8276.2008.01137.x
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Agricultural and Applied Economics Association in its journal American Journal of Agricultural Economics.

Volume (Year): 90 (2008)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 843-855

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:90:y:2008:i:3:p:843-855

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Email:
Web page: http://www.aaea.org/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

Citations

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

Cited by:
  1. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
  2. Scarpa, Riccardo & Thiene, Mara & Hensher, David A., 2009. "Monitoring Choice Task Attribute Attendance In Non-Market Valuation Of Multiple Park Management Services: Does It Matter?," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 50830, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  3. Alejandro Caparrós & Emilio Cerdá & Paola Ovando & Pablo Campos, 2010. "Carbon Sequestration with Reforestations and Biodiversity-scenic Values," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 49-72, January.
  4. David Hensher & David Layton, 2010. "Parameter transfer of common-metric attributes in choice analysis: implications for willingness to pay," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 473-490, May.
  5. Khachatryan, Hayk & Joireman, Jeff & Casavant, Ken, 2013. "The Effects of Intertemporal Considerations on Consumer Preferences for Biofuels," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150334, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  6. Dan Marsh & Yvonne Phillips, 2012. "Which Future for the Hurunui? Combining Choice Analysis with Stakeholder Consultation," Working Papers in Economics 12/17, University of Waikato, Department of Economics.
  7. Hong il Yoo, 2012. "The perceived unreliability of rank-ordered data: an econometric origin and implications," Discussion Papers 2012-46, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
  8. Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Pere Riera & Raul Brey, 2010. "Testing the cognitive burden of two choice modeling valuation variants. The between and within sample approaches," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 30(2), pages 1384-1391.
  9. Marsh, Dan & Phillips, Yvonne, 2012. "Difficult Choices: What Influences the Error Variance in a Choice Experiment," 2012 Conference, August 31, 2012, Nelson, New Zealand 139651, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  10. Catalina M. Torres Figuerola & Antoni Riera Font, 2009. "Defining environmental attributes as external costs in choice experiments: A discussion," CRE Working Papers (Documents de treball del CRE) 2009/1, Centre de Recerca Econòmica (UIB ·"Sa Nostra").

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:90:y:2008:i:3:p:843-855. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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