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

Meta Analysis in Model Implementation: Choice Sets and the Valuation of Air Quality Improvements

Contents:

Author Info

  • Smith, V. Kerry
  • Banzhaf, H. Spencer

    ()
    (Resources for the Future)

Abstract

We document the sensitivity of welfare estimates derived from discrete choice models to assumptions about the choice set. Such assumptions can affect welfare estimates through both the estimated parameters of the model and, conditional on the parameters, the substitution among alternatives. Our analysis involves estimates of the benefits of air quality improvements in Los Angeles based on discrete choices of neighborhood and housing. We further illustrate the use of meta analysis to document and summarize voluminous information derived from repeated sensitivity analyses.

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.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-03-61.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Resources For the Future in its series Discussion Papers with number dp-03-61.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 14 Nov 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-03-61

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.rff.org
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Meta analysis; random utility model; choice set; air quality; housing;

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. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2002. "Quality Adjustment for Spatially-Delineated Public Goods: Theory and Application to Cost-of-Living Indices in Los Angeles," Discussion Papers dp-02-10-, Resources For the Future.
  2. Leamer, Edward E, 1983. "Let's Take the Con Out of Econometrics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(1), pages 31-43, March.
  3. Kenneth Train, 2003. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number emetr2, Spring.
  4. Aviv Nevo, 2001. "New Products, Quality Changes and Welfare Measures Computed From Estimated Demand Systems," NBER Working Papers 8425, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Patrick Bayer & Robert McMillan & Kim Rueben, 2004. "An Equilibrium Model of Sorting in an Urban Housing Market," NBER Working Papers 10865, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. William A. Brock & Steven N. Durlauf, 2002. "A Multinomial-Choice Model of Neighborhood Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 298-303, May.
  7. Patrick Bayer & Nathaniel Keohane & Christopher Timmins, 2006. "Migration and Hedonic Valuation: The Case of Air Quality," NBER Working Papers 12106, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  8. Palmquist, Raymond B., 2006. "Property Value Models," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 16, pages 763-819 Elsevier.
  9. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L., 1999. "Nonlinear Income Effects in Random Utility Models," Staff General Research Papers 1494, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  10. George R. Parsons & A. Brett Hauber, 1998. "Spatial Boundaries and Choice Set Definition in a Random Utility Model of Recreation Demand," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(1), pages 32-48.
  11. Glenn Ellison, 2000. "The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process," NBER Working Papers 7804, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Levinsohn, James & Berry, Steven & Pakes, Ariel, 2004. "Differentiated Products Demand Systems from a Combination of Micro and Macro Data: The New Car Market," Scholarly Articles 3436404, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  13. Quigley, John M., 2006. "Urban Economics," Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy, Working Paper Series qt0jr0p2tk, Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy.
  14. Brock,W.A. & Durlauf,S.N., 2000. "Discrete choice with social interactions," Working papers 7, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  15. George R. Parsons & Mary Jo Kealy, 1992. "Randomly Drawn Opportunity Sets in a Random Utility Model of Lake Recreation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(1), pages 93-106.
  16. Daniel McFadden, 1996. "Computing Willingness-to-Pay in Random Utility Models," Working Papers _011, University of California at Berkeley, Econometrics Laboratory Software Archive.
  17. Raymond B. Palmquist & Adis Israngkura, 1999. "Valuing Air Quality With Hedonic and Discrete Choice Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1128-1133.
  18. George R. Parsons & GAndrew J. Plantinga & GKevin J. Boyle, 2000. "Narrow Choice Sets in a Random Utility Model of Recreation Demand," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(1), pages 86-99.
  19. Chattopadhyay, Sudip, 2000. "The effectiveness of McFaddens's nested logit model in valuing amenity improvement," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 23-43, January.
  20. Quigley, John M., 1985. "Consumer choice of dwelling, neighborhood and public services," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 41-63, February.
  21. Cropper, Maureen L, et al, 1993. "Valuing Product Attributes Using Single Market Data: A Comparison of Hedonic and Discrete Choice Approaches," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(2), pages 225-32, May.
  22. Poterba, James M, 1992. "Taxation and Housing: Old Questions, New Answers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 237-42, May.
  23. Timothy C. Haab & Robert L. Hicks, . "Accounting for Choice Set Endogeneity in Random Utility Models of Recreation Demand," Working Papers 9608, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
  24. Amil Petrin, 2002. "Quantifying the Benefits of New Products: The Case of the Minivan," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(4), pages 705-729, August.
  25. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-90, July.
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. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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).
  4. Kaul, Sapna & Boyle, Kevin J. & Kuminoff, Nicolai V. & Parmeter, Christopher F. & Pope, Jaren C., 2013. "What can we learn from benefit transfer errors? Evidence from 20 years of research on convergent validity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 90-104.
  5. Kuminoff, Nicolai V. & Parmeter, Christopher F. & Pope, Jaren C., 2010. "Which hedonic models can we trust to recover the marginal willingness to pay for environmental amenities?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 145-160, November.

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:rff:dpaper:dp-03-61. 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: (Webmaster).

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.