IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v40y2008i10p1229-1239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is individual environmental consciousness one of the determinants in transport mode choice?

Author

Listed:
  • Junyi Shen
  • Yusuke Sakata
  • Yoshizo Hashimoto

Abstract

This article models negative impact on the environment as one of the attributes of transport mode. By this modelling, we are able to examine whether individual environmental consciousness of this impact plays a significant role in his/her choice of transport mode. A survey data from Saito and Onohara Area in Northern Osaka of Japan is used to estimate the model with the Heteroscedastic Extreme Value specification. Both of the estimated and simulated results imply that individual environmental consciousness does influence his/her decision on transport mode choice in the sample. Furthermore, the likelihood ratio tests indicate that both the utility and scale parameters are not equivalent across sub-samples of university commuters, research-facility commuters and residents. The results of the comparison across sub-samples suggest that sometimes we may learn more from sub-dividing a whole sample into several sub-samples if we could distinguish them by their characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • Junyi Shen & Yusuke Sakata & Yoshizo Hashimoto, 2008. "Is individual environmental consciousness one of the determinants in transport mode choice?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(10), pages 1229-1239.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:40:y:2008:i:10:p:1229-1239
    DOI: 10.1080/00036840600771296
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00036840600771296
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036840600771296?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hausman, Jerry & McFadden, Daniel, 1984. "Specification Tests for the Multinomial Logit Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1219-1240, September.
    2. Karen Gerard & Marian Shanahan & Jordan Louviere, 2003. "Using stated preference discrete choice modelling to inform health care decision-making: A pilot study of breast screening participation," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(9), pages 1073-1085.
    3. Hensher, David A., 0. "The sensitivity of the valuation of travel time savings to the specification of unobserved effects," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(2-3), pages 129-142, April.
    4. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    5. Saroja Selvanathan & E. A. Selvanathan, 2005. "Is utility additive? Further evidence," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 83-86.
    6. Daniel Graham & Stephen Glaister, 2005. "Decomposing the determinants of road traffic demand," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 19-28.
    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. Silvia Banfi & Massimo Filippini & Andrea Horehájová, 2012. "Using a choice experiment to estimate the benefits of a reduction of externalities in urban areas with special focus on electrosmog," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(3), pages 387-397, January.
    2. Marletto, Gerardo, 2011. "Structure, agency and change in the car regime. A review of the literature," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 47, pages 71-88.
    3. H. Schmale & T. Ehrmann & A. Dilger, 2013. "Buying without using -- biases of German BahnCard buyers," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(7), pages 933-941, March.
    4. Junyi Shen, 2009. "Latent class model or mixed logit model? A comparison by transport mode choice data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(22), pages 2915-2924.
    5. Junyi Shen & Yusuke Sakata & Yoshizo Hashimoto, 2006. "A Comparison between Latent Class Model and Mixed Logit Model for Transport Mode Choice: Evidences from Two Datasets of Japan," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 06-05, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    6. UnHyo Kim & Jeongwoo Lee & Sylvia Y. He, 2021. "Pedestrianization Impacts on Air Quality Perceptions and Environment Satisfaction: The Case of Regenerated Streets in Downtown Seoul," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-16, September.
    7. Kavta, Kuldeep & Goswami, Arkopal K., 2022. "Estimating mode choice of motorized two-wheeler commuters under the influence of combined travel demand management measures: An ICLV modeling approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 327-335.
    8. Yusuke Sakata & Junyi Shen & Yoshizo Hashimoto, 2006. "The Influence of Environmental Deterioration and Network Improvement on Transport Modal Choice," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 06-04, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    9. Cristel Antonia Russell & Dale W. Russell & Heather Honea, 2016. "Corporate Social Responsibility Failures: How do Consumers Respond to Corporate Violations of Implied Social Contracts?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(4), pages 759-773, July.

    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. Bellizzi, Maria Grazia & dell'Olio, Luigi & Eboli, Laura & Mazzulla, Gabriella, 2020. "Heterogeneity in desired bus service quality from users’ and potential users’ perspective," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 365-377.
    2. Le Gloux, Fanny & Dupraz, Pierre & Issanchou, Alice & Ropars-Collet, Carole, 2022. "Payments for environmental services with provision thresholds: farmers’ preferences for a conditional bonus," 96th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2022, K U Leuven, Belgium 321177, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    3. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    4. Ahmad Adeel & Bruno Notteboom & Ansar Yasar & Kris Scheerlinck & Jeroen Stevens, 2021. "Sustainable Streetscape and Built Environment Designs around BRT Stations: A Stated Choice Experiment Using 3D Visualizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-21, June.
    5. Reinhard A. Weisser, 2020. "How Personality Shapes Study Location Choices," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 61(1), pages 88-116, February.
    6. Emmanouil Mentzakis & Mandy Ryan & Paul McNamee, 2011. "Using discrete choice experiments to value informal care tasks: exploring preference heterogeneity," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(8), pages 930-944, August.
    7. Bui Bich Xuan & Erlend Dancke Sandorf, 2020. "Potential for Sustainable Aquaculture: Insights from Discrete Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(2), pages 401-421, October.
    8. Balaine, Lorraine & Gallai, Nicola & Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Kephaliacos, Charilaos, 2020. "Trading off environmental goods for compensations: Insights from traditional and deliberative valuation methods in the Ecuadorian Amazon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    9. Stefanie Peer & Erik Verhoef & Jasper Knockaert & Paul Koster & Yin‐Yen Tseng, 2015. "Long‐Run Versus Short‐Run Perspectives On Consumer Scheduling: Evidence From A Revealed‐Preference Experiment Among Peak‐Hour Road Commuters," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(1), pages 303-323, February.
    10. Haile, Kaleab K. & Tirivayi, Nyasha & Tesfaye, Wondimagegn, 2019. "Farmers’ willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services on agricultural land: The case of climate-smart agroforestry in Ethiopia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    11. Cécile Hérivaux & Philippe Le Coent, 2021. "Introducing Nature into Cities or Preserving Existing Peri-Urban Ecosystems? Analysis of Preferences in a Rapidly Urbanizing Catchment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-34, January.
    12. Tina Rambonilaza, 2012. "Demande de séjour touristique en espace rural et vecteurs de valorisation marchande d’aménités naturelles et patrimoniales," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 93(4), pages 423-441.
    13. Erlend Dancke Sandorf & Kristine Grimsrud & Henrik Lindhjem, 2022. "Ponderous, Proficient or Professional? Survey Experience and Smartphone Effects in Stated Preference Research," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(4), pages 807-832, April.
    14. Reithmayer, Corrinna & Danne, Michael & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2019. "Societal attitudes in ovo gender determination as an alternative to chick culling," DARE Discussion Papers 1906, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    15. Houessionon, P. & Fonta, W. M. & Bossa, A. Y. & Sanfo, S. & Thiombiano, N. & Zahonogo, P. & Yameogo, T. B. & Balana, Bedru, "undated". "Economic valuation of ecosystem services from small-scale agricultural management interventions in Burkina Faso: a discrete choice experiment approach," Papers published in Journals (Open Access) H048370, International Water Management Institute.
    16. Rambonilaza, Tina, 2012. "Demande de séjour touristique en espace rural et vecteurs de valorisation marchande d’aménités naturelles et patrimoniales," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 93(4).
    17. Mehdi Ammi & Christine Peyron, 2016. "Heterogeneity in general practitioners’ preferences for quality improvement programs: a choice experiment and policy simulation in France," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-11, December.
    18. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    19. Joachim Marti & John Buckell & Johanna Catherine Maclean & Jody L. Sindelar, 2016. "To ‘Vape’ or Smoke? A Discrete Choice Experiment Among U.S. Adult Smokers," NBER Working Papers 22079, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Iván Pérez-Rubio & Daniel Flores & Christian Vargas & Francisco Jiménez & Iker Etxano, 2021. "To What Extent Are Cattle Ranching Landholders Willing to Restore Ecosystem Services? Constructing a Micro-Scale PES Scheme in Southern Costa Rica," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-24, July.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C35 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • R41 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion; Travel Time; Safety and Accidents; Transportation Noise

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:applec:v:40:y:2008:i:10:p:1229-1239. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    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.