IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eejocm/v50y2024ics175553452400006x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Australian community preferences for hotel quarantine options within the Logit Mixed Logit Model framework

Author

Listed:
  • Pellegrini, Andrea
  • Borriello, Antonio
  • Rose, John M.

Abstract

In response to the Covid-19 pandemic, many countries have adopted measures to contain the spread of the virus, including mandatory quarantine for inbound travellers. This research investigates the preferences of residents of New South Wales, Australia, towards the mandatory quarantine protocol adopted in the state. Heterogeneity in individual preferences is explored by advancing the Logit Mixed Logit (LML) model defined by Train (2016). Two approaches are suggested to decompose individual heterogeneity in this framework and are applied to data collected via a stated preference experiment. The empirical findings demonstrate that on average, the community prefers returned travellers be quarantined in dedicated quarantine facilities rather than be quarantined at home or using hotels, but are mostly indifferent to how long travellers are quarantined for, and how many travellers are allowed to return to Australia. The sample do however have a preference, on average for travellers having to pay less to quarantine, meaning they wish to see greater government subsidies. However, the modelling approach demonstrates that the common use of averages potentially masks diverse preferences, and is not representative of community wants and desires, thus possibly leading to incorrect inferences about policy impacts.

Suggested Citation

  • Pellegrini, Andrea & Borriello, Antonio & Rose, John M., 2024. "Australian community preferences for hotel quarantine options within the Logit Mixed Logit Model framework," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:50:y:2024:i:c:s175553452400006x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2024.100473
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175553452400006X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jocm.2024.100473?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 search for a different version of it.

    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:eee:eejocm:v:50:y:2024:i:c:s175553452400006x. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-choice-modelling .

    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.