IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/earnsa/343510.html

Device effects: Results from choice experiments in an agritourism context

Author

Listed:
  • Tavárez, Héctor
  • Cortés, Mildred

Abstract

[EN] This study uses a questionnaire to examine device use effects in choice experiments and to estimate willingness to pay (WTP) values for agritourism-related activities. The results indicate that respondents using devices with large screens are more confident of their responses, dedicate more time to the valuation exercise, and select the status quo option less frequently. However, WTP for agritourism and perceived choice experiment complexity are invariant with regards to the device. Respondents’ WTP for selected agritourism activities varies from $5 to $21 per visit. [ES] Utilizamos un cuestionario para examinar los efectos del uso de dispositivos en los experimentos de elección y estimar la disposición a pagar (DAP) por actividades relacionadas con el agroturismo. Los resultados indican que los encuestados que utilizan dispositivos con pantallas grandes tienen más confianza en sus respuestas, dedican más tiempo al ejercicio de valoración y seleccionan con menos frecuencia la opción de statu quo. Sin embargo, la DAP por agroturismo y la percepción sobre la complejidad del experimento de elección son invariantes con respecto al dispositivo. La DAP por las actividades de agroturismo seleccionadas varía de $5 a $21 por visita.

Suggested Citation

  • Tavárez, Héctor & Cortés, Mildred, 2024. "Device effects: Results from choice experiments in an agritourism context," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 24(01), June.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:earnsa:343510
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.343510
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/343510/files/EARN_24_1_5-27.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.343510?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jürgen Meyerhoff & Ulf Liebe, 2009. "Status Quo Effect in Choice Experiments: Empirical Evidence on Attitudes and Choice Task Complexity," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(3), pages 515-528.
    2. David Revelt and Kenneth Train., 2000. "Customer-Specific Taste Parameters and Mixed Logit: Households' Choice of Electricity Supplier," Economics Working Papers E00-274, University of California at Berkeley.
    3. Tong Wu & Shida Rastegari Henneberry & John N. Ng’ombe & Richard T. Melstrom, 2020. "Chinese Demand for Agritourism in Rural America," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-11, April.
    4. Tavárez, Héctor & Elbakidze, Levan, 2019. "Valuing recreational enhancements in the San Patricio Urban Forest of Puerto Rico: A choice experiment approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    5. Lucia Rocchi & Anastasija Novikova & Bernardas Vaznonis, 2022. "Assessing Consumer Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Agricultural Landscape Attributes in Lithuania," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, September.
    6. Malone, Trey & Lusk, Jayson L., 2018. "Consequences of Participant Inattention with an Application to Carbon Taxes for Meat Products," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 218-230.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Tavárez, Héctor & Elbakidze, Levan, 2021. "Urban forests valuation and environmental disposition: The case of Puerto Rico," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    2. Héctor Tavárez & Alicia Barriga, 2023. "Economic Viability of Developing Passive Recreational Opportunities in Puerto Rico: Insights for Sustainable Forest Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Tavárez, Héctor & Elbakidze, Levan, 2019. "Valuing recreational enhancements in the San Patricio Urban Forest of Puerto Rico: A choice experiment approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    4. Filiptseva, Anna & Filler, Günther & Odening, Martin, 2022. "Compensation Options for Quarantine Costs in Plant Production," 62nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 7-9, 2022 329595, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    5. Ole Bonnichsen & Jacob Ladenburg, 2010. "Reducing Status Quo Bias in Choice Experiments – An Application of a Protest Reduction Entreaty," IFRO Working Paper 2010/7, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    6. Allais, Olivier & Etilé, Fabrice & Lecocq, Sébastien, 2015. "Mandatory labels, taxes and market forces: An empirical evaluation of fat policies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 27-44.
    7. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
    8. Vecchio, Riccardo & Caso, Gerarda & Cembalo, Luigi & Borrello, Massimiliano, . "Is respondents’ inattention in online surveys a major issue for research?," Economia agro-alimentare / Food Economy, Italian Society of Agri-food Economics/Società Italiana di Economia Agro-Alimentare (SIEA), vol. 22(01).
    9. Otrachshenko, Vladimir & Tyurina, Elena & Nagapetyan, Artur, 2022. "The economic value of the Glass Beach: Contingent valuation and life satisfaction approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    10. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2011. "Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Comparison of Survey Modes," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(4), pages 309-351, September.
    11. Penn, Jerrod & Jiang, Qi & Hu, Wuyang, 2025. "The Efficacy of Seven Hypothetical Bias Mitigation Methods," 2025 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2025, Denver, CO 360817, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Rakotonarivo, O. Sarobidy & Bredahl Jacobsen, Jette & Poudyal, Mahesh & Rasoamanana, Alexandra & Hockley, Neal, 2018. "Estimating welfare impacts where property rights are contested: methodological and policy implications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 71-83.
    13. Esther W. Bekker-Grob & Bas Donkers & Jorien Veldwijk & Marcel F. Jonker & Sylvia Buis & Jan Huisman & Patrick Bindels, 2021. "What Factors Influence Non-Participation Most in Colorectal Cancer Screening? A Discrete Choice Experiment," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 14(2), pages 269-281, March.
    14. Merritt, Meagan G. & Delong, Karen Lewis & Griffith, Andrew P. & Jensen, Kimberly L., 2018. "Consumer Willingness To Pay For Tennessee Certified Beef," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(2), pages 233-254, May.
    15. Barr, Rhona F. & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Investigating fishers' preferences for the design of marine Payments for Environmental Services schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 91-103.
    16. Anna E. Tuchman & Harikesh S. Nair & Pedro M. Gardete, 2018. "Television ad-skipping, consumption complementarities and the consumer demand for advertising," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 111-174, June.
    17. Zhenshan Chen & Stephen K. Swallow & Ian T. Yue, 2020. "Non-participation and Heterogeneity in Stated: A Double Hurdle Latent Class Approach for Climate Change Adaptation Plans and Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(1), pages 35-67, September.
    18. Galina Williams, 2015. "Households Willingness to Pay for the Emissions Reduction Policy, Queensland, Australia," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(3), pages 21582440156, September.
    19. Schuster, Monica & Vranken, Liesbet & Maertens, Miet, 2017. "You can('t) always get the job you want: stated versus revealed employment preferences in the Peruvian agro-industry," IOB Working Papers 2017.04, Universiteit Antwerpen, Institute of Development Policy (IOB).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:ags:earnsa:343510. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeeaaea.html .

    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.