Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Narrow Choice Sets in a Random Utility Model of Recreation Demand

Contents:

Author Info

  • George R. Parsons
  • GAndrew J. Plantinga
  • GKevin J. Boyle

Abstract

We consider the implications of narrow choice sets on welfare estimation in a random utility model of recreation demand. We hypothesize that careful formulation of the choice set focusing on the sites of policy interest and their closest substitutes will give reasonably accurate welfare estimates. We use nearby sites as close substitutes and treat more distant sites as aggregate alternatives in our application to fishing in Maine. We find that the welfare estimates are rather sensitive to narrowing choice sets in this manner. The sensitivity largely tracts variation in the estimated travel cost coefficient across the different models considered.

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://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/3147259.pdf
Download Restriction: A subscripton is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.

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 University of Wisconsin Press in its journal Land Economics.

Volume (Year): 76 (2000)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Pages: 86-99

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:76:y:2000:i:1:p:86-99

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://le.uwpress.org/

Related research

Keywords:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

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. Christopher Jeffords, 2014. "Preference-directed regulation when ethical environmental policy choices are formed with limited information," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 573-606, March.
  2. Hicks, Robert L. & Schnier, Kurt E., 2010. "Spatial regulations and endogenous consideration sets in fisheries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 117-134, April.
  3. Termansen, Mette & McClean, Colin J. & Jensen, Frank Søndergaard, 2013. "Modelling and mapping spatial heterogeneity in forest recreation services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 48-57.
  4. Christopher Avery & Caroline M. Hoxby, 2003. "Do and Should Financial Aid Packages Affect Students' College Choices?," NBER Working Papers 9482, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Roger Haefen, 2008. "Latent Consideration Sets and Continuous Demand Systems," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(3), pages 363-379, November.
  6. Paudel, Krishna P. & Caffey, Rex H. & Devkota, Nirmala, 2011. "An Evaluation of Factors Affecting the Choice of Coastal Recreational Activities," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(02), May.
  7. Kuminoff, Nicolai V., 2009. "Decomposing the structural identification of non-market values," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 123-139, March.
  8. Scrogin, David & Hofler, Richard & Boyle, Kevin J. & Milon, J. Walter, 2004. "On The Frontier Of Generating Revealed Preference Choice Sets: An Efficient Approach," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20134, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  9. Robert Deacon & Felix Schläpfer, 2010. "The Spatial Range of Public Goods Revealed Through Referendum Voting," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 305-328, November.
  10. Smith, V. Kerry & Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2003. "Meta Analysis in Model Implementation: Choice Sets and the Valuation of Air Quality Improvements," Discussion Papers dp-03-61, Resources For the Future.
  11. J. DeShazo & Trudy Cameron & Manrique Saenz, 2009. "The Effect of Consumers’ Real-World Choice Sets on Inferences from Stated Preference Surveys," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 42(3), pages 319-343, March.
  12. Bengochea, A., 2003. "Valoración del uso recreativo de un espacio natural," Estudios de Economía Aplicada, Estudios de Economía Aplicada, vol. 21, pages 321-338, Agosto.
  13. Stephen L. DeJardins & Dennis A. Ahlburg & Brian McCall, . "An Integrated Model of Application, Admission, Enrollment, and Financial Aid," Working Papers 0104, Human Resources and Labor Studies, University of Minnesota (Twin Cities Campus).
  14. Phaneuf, Daniel J. & Smith, V. Kerry, 2006. "Recreation Demand Models," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 671-761 Elsevier.
  15. Domanski, Adam, 2009. "Estimating Mixed Logit Recreation Demand Models With Large Choice Sets," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49413, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  16. Yongjie Ji & Joseph A. Herriges & Catherine L. Kling, 2013. "Modeling Recreation Demand when the Access Point is Unknown," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 13-wp540, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
  17. Hicks, Robert L., 2002. "A Comparison Of Stated And Revealed Preference Methods For Fisheries Management," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19853, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

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:uwp:landec:v:76:y:2000:i:1:p:86-99. 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: ().

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.