IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

A latent segmentation approach to a Kuhn-Tucker model: An application to recreation demand

  • Kuriyama, Koichi
  • Michael Hanemann, W.
  • Hilger, James R.

In this paper, we extend the latent segmentation approach to the Kuhn-Tucker (KT) model. The proposed approach models heterogeneity in preferences for recreational behavior, using a utility theoretical framework to simultaneously model participation and site selection decisions. Estimation of the latent segmentation KT model with standard maximum likelihood techniques is numerically difficult because of the large number of parameters in the segment membership functions and the utility function for each latent segment. To address this problem, we propose the expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm to estimate the model. In the empirical section, we implement the EM latent segmentation KT approach to analyze a Southern California beach recreation data set. Our empirical analysis suggests that three groups exist in the sample. Using the model to analyze two hypothetical beach management policy scenarios illustrates different welfare impacts across groups.

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:
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.

Volume (Year): 60 (2010)
Issue (Month): 3 (November)
Pages: 209-220

in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:jeeman:v:60:y:2010:i:3:p:209-220
Contact details of provider: Web page:

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. von Haefen R.H. & Phaneuf D.J. & Parsons G.R., 2004. "Estimation and Welfare Analysis With Large Demand Systems," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 22, pages 194-205, April.
  2. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, October.
  3. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
  4. Daniel J. Phaneuf & Catherine L. Kling & Joseph A. Herriges, 2000. "Estimation and Welfare Calculations in a Generalized Corner Solution Model with an Application to Recreation Demand," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(1), pages 83-92, February.
  5. Bill Provencher & Kenneth A. Baerenklau & Richard C. Bishop, 2002. "A Finite Mixture Logit Model of Recreational Angling with Serially Correlated Random Utility," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(4), pages 1066-1075.
  6. Wales, T. J. & Woodland, A. D., 1983. "Estimation of consumer demand systems with binding non-negativity constraints," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 263-285, April.
  7. von Haefen, Roger H., 2003. "Incorporating observed choice into the construction of welfare measures from random utility models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 145-165, March.
  8. Paul A. Ruud., 1988. "Extensions of Estimation Methods Using the EM Algorithm.," Economics Working Papers 8899, University of California at Berkeley.
  9. von Haefen, Roger H., 2007. "Empirical strategies for incorporating weak complementarity into consumer demand models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 15-31, July.
  10. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 2004. "What's the Use? Welfare Estimates from Revealed Preference Models when Weak Complementarity Does Not Hold," Staff General Research Papers 1905, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  11. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-19, November.
  12. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 1999. "Corner Solution Models of Recreation Demand: A Comparison of Competing Frameworks," Staff General Research Papers 1513, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  13. Bhat, Chandra R., 2005. "A multiple discrete-continuous extreme value model: formulation and application to discretionary time-use decisions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 679-707, September.
  14. von Haefen, Roger H. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 2003. "Estimating preferences for outdoor recreation:: a comparison of continuous and count data demand system frameworks," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 612-630, May.
  15. Stephen Hynes & Nick Hanley & Riccardo Scarpa, 2008. "Effects on Welfare Measures of Alternative Means of Accounting for Preference Heterogeneity in Recreational Demand Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1011-1027.
  16. Bhat, Chandra R., 2001. "Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 677-693, August.
  17. Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene, 2004. "Destination Choice Models for Rock Climbing in the Northeast Alps: A Latent-Class Approach Based on Intensity of Participation," Working Papers 2004.131, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  18. 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.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jeeman:v:60:y:2010:i:3:p:209-220. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.