Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Dealing with ignored attributes in choice experiments on valuation of Sweden’s environmental quality objectives

Contents:

Author Info

  • Carlsson, Fredrik

    ()
    (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University)

  • Kataria, Mitesh

    ()
    (Department of Policy Analysis, National Environmental Research Institute)

  • Lampi, Elina

    ()
    (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University)

Abstract

In this paper we use follow-up questions to investigate whether attributes have been ignored in a choice experiment on environmental goods. This information is subsequently used in the estimation of the model by restricting the individual parameters for the ignored attributes to zero. We then separately estimate the marginal willingness to pay (WTP) for the whole sample and for those who took all attributes into account. We find no significant differences in mean marginal WTP between these two models. However, when taking the shares of respondents who considered both the environmental and the cost attributes (52 -69 percent of the respondents) into account, then the marginal WTPs for each attribute change if the respondents who ignored the attributes have a zero WTP. Hence, not taking into account whether respondents have considered the attribute could give biased welfare estimates and wrong policy implications. We also investigate whether any socioeconomic characteristics can explain who ignores attributes, and find that very few of the variables are significant, indicating that we can only partly explain the behavior.

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/2077/9568
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers in Economics with number 289.

as in new window
Length: 35 pages
Date of creation: 20 Feb 2008
Date of revision: 01 Mar 2009
Publication status: Published in Environmental and Resource Economics, 2010, pages 65-89.
Handle: RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0289

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, University of Gothenburg, Box 640, SE 405 30 GÖTEBORG, Sweden
Phone: 031-773 10 00
Web page: http://www.handels.gu.se/econ/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Choice experiment; WTP; ignoring attributes; follow-up question; environmental quality objectives;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Lagerkvist, Carl-Johan, 2004. "Using Cheap-Talk as a Test of Validity in Choice Experiments," Working Papers in Economics, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics 128, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  2. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh, 2006. "Assessing management options for weed control with demanders and non-demanders in a choice experiment," Working Papers in Economics, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics 208, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  3. John List & Paramita Sinha & Michael Taylor, 2006. "Using choice experiments to value non-market goods and services: Evidence from field experiments," Natural Field Experiments 00278, The Field Experiments Website.
  4. McFadden, Daniel L. & Bemmaor, Albert C. & Caro, Francis G. & Dominitz, Jeff & Jun, Byung-hill & Lewbel, Arthur & Matzkin, Rosa L. & Molinari, Francesca & Schwarz, Norbert & Willis, Robert J. & Winter, 2005. "Statistical analysis of choice experiments and surveys," Munich Reprints in Economics, University of Munich, Department of Economics 19251, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
  5. Danny Campbell & W. George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa, 2007. "Incorporating Discontinuous Preferences into the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments," Working Papers in Economics, University of Waikato, Department of Economics 07/18, University of Waikato, Department of Economics.
  6. DeShazo, J. R. & Fermo, German, 2002. "Designing Choice Sets for Stated Preference Methods: The Effects of Complexity on Choice Consistency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 123-143, July.
  7. Peter Martinsson, 2002. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA) sp200205t2, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised May 2002.
  8. Bengt Kristr�m, 1997. "Spike Models in Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(3), pages 1013-1023.
  9. Timothy Haab, 1999. "Nonparticipation or Misspecification? The Impacts of Nonparticipation on Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(4), pages 443-461, December.
  10. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Martinsson, 2003. "Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(4), pages 281-294.
  11. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
  12. Persson, Ulf, et al, 2001. " The Value of a Statistical Life in Transport: Findings from a New Contingent Valuation Study in Sweden," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 121-34, September.
  13. Rosenberger, Randall S. & Peterson, George L. & Clarke, Andrea & Brown, Thomas C., 2003. "Measuring dispositions for lexicographic preferences of environmental goods: integrating economics, psychology and ethics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 63-76, February.
  14. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Frykblom & Carl Lagerkvist, 2007. "Preferences with and without prices - does the price attribute affect behavior in stated preference surveys?," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(2), pages 155-164, October.
  15. Johnson, F. Reed & Desvousges, William H., 1997. "Estimating Stated Preferences with Rated-Pair Data: Environmental, Health, and Employment Effects of Energy Programs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 79-99, September.
  16. Thomas H. Stevens & Jaime Echeverria & Ronald J. Glass & Tim Hager & Thomas A. More, 1991. "Measuring the Existence Value of Wildlife: What Do CVM Estimates Really Show?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(4), pages 390-400.
  17. David Hensher & John Rose & William Greene, 2005. "The implications on willingness to pay of respondents ignoring specific attributes," Transportation, Springer, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 203-222, 05.
  18. Clinch, J Peter & Murphy, Anthony, 2001. "Modelling Winners and Losers in Contingent Valuation of Public Goods: Appropriate Welfare Measures and Econometric Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(470), pages 420-43, April.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Campbell, Danny & Hensher, David A. & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2012. "Cost thresholds, cut-offs and sensitivities in stated choice analysis: Identification and implications," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 396-411.
  2. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny & Hynes, Stephen & van Rensburg, Tom M., 2011. "The effect of using labelled alternatives in stated choice experiments: an exploration focusing on farmland walking trails in Ireland," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK, Agricultural Economics Society 108792, Agricultural Economics Society.
  3. Colombo, Sergio & Christie, Michael & Hanley, Nick, 2013. "What are the consequences of ignoring attributes in choice experiments? Implications for ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 25-35.
  4. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Stale, 2011. "Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Comparison of Survey Modes," MPRA Paper 35633, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  5. Greiner, Romy & Bliemer, Michiel & Ballweg, Julie, 2014. "Design considerations of a choice experiment to estimate likely participation by north Australian pastoralists in contractual biodiversity conservation," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 34-45.
  6. Scarpa, Riccardo & Notaro, Sandra & Raffaelli, Roberta & Louviere, Jordan, 2011. "Modelling attribute non-attendance in best-worst rank ordered choice data to estimate tourism benefits from Alpine pasture heritage," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland, European Association of Agricultural Economists 115990, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  7. Stephane Hess & Amanda Stathopoulos & Danny Campbell & Vikki O’Neill & Sebastian Caussade, 2013. "It’s not that I don’t care, I just don’t care very much: confounding between attribute non-attendance and taste heterogeneity," Transportation, Springer, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 583-607, May.
  8. Stephane Hess & David Hensher, 2013. "Making use of respondent reported processing information to understand attribute importance: a latent variable scaling approach," Transportation, Springer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 397-412, February.
  9. Collins, Andrew T. & Rose, John M. & Hensher, David A., 2013. "Specification issues in a generalised random parameters attribute nonattendance model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 234-253.
  10. Marsh, Dan & Mkwara, Lena Asimenye & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2010. "Does respondent’s perceived knowledge of the status quo affect attribute attendance and WTP in choice experiments? Evidence from the Karapiro Catchment Freshwater streams," 2010 Conference, August 26-27, 2010, Nelson, New Zealand, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society 96809, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  11. David Hensher & Andrew Collins & William Greene, 2013. "Accounting for attribute non-attendance and common-metric aggregation in a probabilistic decision process mixed multinomial logit model: a warning on potential confounding," Transportation, Springer, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 1003-1020, September.
  12. Arne Risa Hole & Julie Riise Kolstad & Dorte Gyrd-Hansen, 2012. "Inferred vs Stated Attribute Non-Attendance in Choice Experiments: A Study of Doctors' Prescription Behaviour," Working Papers, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics 2012010, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics.
  13. Mohammed Alemu & Morten Mørkbak & Søren Olsen & Carsten Jensen, 2013. "Attending to the Reasons for Attribute Non-attendance in Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 54(3), pages 333-359, March.
  14. Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa, 2013. "Preference discontinuity in choice experiment: Determinants and implications," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 138-145.

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:hhs:gunwpe:0289. 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: (Marie Andersson).

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.