IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeeman/v81y2017icp152-173.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Choice set formation for outdoor destinations: The role of motivations and preference discrimination in site selection for the management of public expenditures on protected areas

Author

Listed:
  • Thiene, Mara
  • Swait, Joffre
  • Scarpa, Riccardo

Abstract

Effective public expenditure currently dominates the management focus of many protected areas. This calls for explicit modeling of constraints and motivations that, respectively, obstruct and stimulate visits to selected outdoor destinations. Choice set formation is the result of screening and/or inclusion of specific sites (alternatives) to form the set of sites considered in real choices. Evidence shows that the omission of a structural representation of choice set formation is harmful to econometric inference. Yet, the literature has largely ignored the underlying behavioral phenomenon. We show, using a discrete choice experiment involving selection among seven recreational sites in an Italian national park, that choice set formation is behaviorally relevant, even after controlling for preference discrimination. Motivations (why visit?) are important determinants of preliminary site screening for choice set inclusion, as well as site selection, justifying the additional value of such modeling extension.

Suggested Citation

  • Thiene, Mara & Swait, Joffre & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2017. "Choice set formation for outdoor destinations: The role of motivations and preference discrimination in site selection for the management of public expenditures on protected areas," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 152-173.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeeman:v:81:y:2017:i:c:p:152-173
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2016.08.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069616301838
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jeem.2016.08.002?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph A. Herriges & Catherine L. Kling, 1997. "The Performance of Nested Logit Models When Welfare Estimation Is the Goal," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(3), pages 792-802.
    2. Charles F. Manski, 2013. "Response to the Review of ‘Public Policy in an Uncertain World’," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0, pages 412-415, August.
    3. Benjamin Scheibehenne & Rainer Greifeneder & Peter M. Todd, 2010. "Can There Ever Be Too Many Options? A Meta-Analytic Review of Choice Overload," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(3), pages 409-425, October.
    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. 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.
    6. Robert L. Hicks & Ivar E. Strand, 2000. "The Extent of Information: Its Relevance for Random Utility Models," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(3), pages 374-385.
    7. Kling, Catherine L. & Bockstael, Nancy & Hanemann, W. Michael, 1987. "Estimating the Value of Water Quality Improvements in a Recreational Demand Framework," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1594, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    8. 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.
    9. Swait, Joffre, 2001. "Choice set generation within the generalized extreme value family of discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 643-666, August.
    10. Peter P. Caulkins & Richard C. Bishop & Nicolaas W. Bouwes, 1986. "The Travel Cost Model for Lake Recreation: A Comparison of Two Methods for Incorporating Site Quality and Substitution Effects," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(2), pages 291-297.
    11. Kling, Catherine L. & Herriges, Joseph A., 1997. "Model Performance of Nested Logit Models when Welfare Estimation is the Goal, The," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12331, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Swait, Joffre, 2001. "A non-compensatory choice model incorporating attribute cutoffs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 903-928, November.
    13. Alexander Chernev & Ulf Böckenholt & Joseph Goodman, 2010. "Commentary on Scheibehenne, Greifeneder, and Todd Choice Overload: Is There Anything to It?," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(3), pages 426-428, October.
    14. Morey, Edward & Thiene, Mara, 2012. "A parsimonious, stacked latent-class methodology for predicting behavioral heterogeneity in terms of life-constraint heterogeneity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 130-144.
    15. Edward R. Morey & Robert D. Rowe & Michael Watson, 1993. "A Repeated Nested-Logit Model of Atlantic Salmon Fishing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(3), pages 578-592.
    16. Li, Lianhua & Adamowicz, Wiktor & Swait, Joffre, 2015. "The effect of choice set misspecification on welfare measures in random utility models," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 71-92.
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i::p:371-388 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Haab, Timothy C. & Hicks, Robert L., 1997. "Accounting for Choice Set Endogeneity in Random Utility Models of Recreation Demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 127-147, October.
    19. Kreps, David M, 1979. "A Representation Theorem for "Preference for Flexibility"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 565-577, May.
    20. Joffre Swait & Tülin Erdem, 2007. "Brand Effects on Choice and Choice Set Formation Under Uncertainty," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 679-697, 09-10.
    21. Hauser, John R., 2014. "Consideration-set heuristics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1688-1699.
    22. Manski, Charles F., 2013. "Public Policy in an Uncertain World: Analysis and Decisions," Economics Books, Harvard University Press, number 9780674066892, Spring.
    23. Herbert A. Simon, 1991. "Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 125-134, February.
    24. repec:cup:judgdm:v:2:y:2007:i::p:137-168 is not listed on IDEAS
    25. Provencher, Bill & Bishop, R.C.Richard C., 2004. "Does accounting for preference heterogeneity improve the forecasting of a random utility model? A case study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 793-810, July.
    26. 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.
    27. Swait, Joffre & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 1987. "Incorporating random constraints in discrete models of choice set generation," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 91-102, April.
    28. Provencher, Bill & Bishop, Richard C., 1997. "An Estimable Dynamic Model of Recreation Behavior with an Application to Great Lakes Angling," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 107-127, June.
    29. 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.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Nguyen, Minh Duc & Ancev, Tiho & Randall, Alan, 2020. "Forest governance and economic values of forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Stafford, Tess M., 2018. "Accounting for outside options in discrete choice models: An application to commercial fishing effort," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 159-179.
    3. English, Eric & von Haefen, Roger H. & Herriges, Joseph & Leggett, Christopher & Lupi, Frank & McConnell, Kenneth & Welsh, Michael & Domanski, Adam & Meade, Norman, 2018. "Estimating the value of lost recreation days from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 26-45.
    4. Campbell, Danny & Mørkbak, Morten Raun & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2018. "The link between response time and preference, variance and processing heterogeneity in stated choice experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 18-34.
    5. Tsoleridis, Panagiotis & Choudhury, Charisma F. & Hess, Stephane, 2022. "Deriving transport appraisal values from emerging revealed preference data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 225-245.
    6. Liu, Zhaoyang & Hanley, Nick & Campbell, Danny, 2020. "Linking urban air pollution with residents’ willingness to pay for greenspace: A choice experiment study in Beijing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    7. Joffre Swait & Cristiano Franceschinis & Mara Thiene, 2020. "Antecedent Volition and Spatial Effects: Can Multiple Goal Pursuit Mitigate Distance Decay?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(2), pages 243-270, February.
    8. John N. Ng’ombe & B. Wade Brorsen, 2022. "The Effect of Including Irrelevant Alternatives in Discrete Choice Models of Recreation Demand," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 60(1), pages 71-97, June.
    9. Edenbrandt, Anna Kristina & Lagerkvist, Carl-Johan & Lüken, Malte & Orquin, Jacob L., 2022. "Seen but not considered? Awareness and consideration in choice analysis," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    10. Benedict G. C. Dellaert & Joffre Swait & Wiktor L. Vic Adamowicz & Theo A. Arentze & Elizabeth E. Bruch & Elisabetta Cherchi & Caspar Chorus & Bas Donkers & Fred M. Feinberg & A. A. J. Marley & Linda , 2018. "Individuals’ Decisions in the Presence of Multiple Goals," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 51-64, March.
      • Dellaert, B.G.C. & Swait, J. & Adamowicz, W.L. & Arentze, T.A. & Bruch, E.E. & Cherchi, E. & Chorus, C.G. & Donkers, A.C.D. & Feinberg, F.M. & Marley, A.A.J. & Salisbury, L.C., 2017. "Individuals' Decisions in the Presence of Multiple Goals," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2017-007-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    11. Ng'ombe, John, 2019. "Economics of the Greenseeder Hand Planter, Discrete Choice Modeling, and On-Farm Field Experimentation," Thesis Commons jckt7, Center for Open Science.
    12. Kassahun, Habtamu Tilahun & Swait, Joffre & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2021. "Distortions in willingness-to-pay for public goods induced by endemic distrust in institutions," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    13. Börger, Tobias & Ngoc, Quach Thi Khanh & Kuhfuss, Laure & Hien, Tang Thi & Hanley, Nick & Campbell, Danny, 2021. "Preferences for coastal and marine conservation in Vietnam: Accounting for differences in individual choice set formation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    14. West, Grant H. & Snell, Heather & Kovacs, Kent & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2020. "Estimation of the preferences for the intertemporal services from groundwater," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304220, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Habtamu Tilahun Kassahun & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen & Joffre Swait & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen, 2020. "Social Cooperation in the Context of Integrated Private and Common Land Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(1), pages 105-136, January.
    16. Agata Mesjasz-Lech, 2017. "Environmental Protection Expenditures and Effects of Environmental Governance of Sustainable Development in Manufacture Enterprise," Proceedings- 11th International Conference on Mangement, Enterprise and Benchmarking (MEB 2017),, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    17. Mariel, Petr & Artabe, Alaitz, 2020. "Interpreting correlated random parameters in choice experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).

    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. Li, Lianhua & Adamowicz, Wiktor & Swait, Joffre, 2015. "The effect of choice set misspecification on welfare measures in random utility models," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 71-92.
    2. 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.
    3. Hicks, Robert L. & Holland, Daniel S. & Kuriyama, Peter T. & Schnier, Kurt E., 2020. "Choice sets for spatial discrete choice models in data rich environments," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    4. Stafford, Tess M., 2018. "Accounting for outside options in discrete choice models: An application to commercial fishing effort," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 159-179.
    5. Hicks, Robert L. & Schnier, Kurt E., 2010. "Spatial regulations and endogenous consideration sets in fisheries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 117-134, April.
    6. Yongjie Ji & Joseph A. Herriges & Catherine L. Kling, 2016. "Modeling Recreation Demand When the Access Point Is Unknown," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(3), pages 860-880.
    7. J. DeShazo & Trudy Cameron & Manrique Saenz, 2009. "The Effect of Consumers’ Real-World Choice Sets on Inferences from Stated Preference Surveys," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 42(3), pages 319-343, March.
    8. 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).
    9. 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.
    10. Edenbrandt, Anna Kristina & Lagerkvist, Carl-Johan & Lüken, Malte & Orquin, Jacob L., 2022. "Seen but not considered? Awareness and consideration in choice analysis," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    11. Schwabe, Kurt A. & Schuhmann, Peter W., 1999. "The Value Of Increasing The Length Of Deer Season In Ohio," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21574, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. John N. Ng’ombe & B. Wade Brorsen, 2022. "The Effect of Including Irrelevant Alternatives in Discrete Choice Models of Recreation Demand," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 60(1), pages 71-97, June.
    13. Thuy Truong & Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter C. Boxall, 2018. "Modelling the Effect of Chronic Wasting Disease on Recreational Hunting Site Choice Preferences and Choice Set Formation over Time," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(1), pages 271-295, May.
    14. H. Spencer Banzhaf & V. Kerry Smith, 2007. "Meta-analysis in model implementation: choice sets and the valuation of air quality improvements," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(6), pages 1013-1031.
    15. Jordan Louviere & Kenneth Train & Moshe Ben-Akiva & Chandra Bhat & David Brownstone & Trudy Cameron & Richard Carson & J. Deshazo & Denzil Fiebig & William Greene & David Hensher & Donald Waldman, 2005. "Recent Progress on Endogeneity in Choice Modeling," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 255-265, December.
    16. Bruno Wichmann & Minjie Chen & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2016. "Social Networks and Choice Set Formation in Discrete Choice Models," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-26, October.
    17. Kassahun, Habtamu Tilahun & Swait, Joffre & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2021. "Distortions in willingness-to-pay for public goods induced by endemic distrust in institutions," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    18. Backstrom, Jesse D. & Woodward, Richard T., 2017. "Using Qualitative Site Characteristics Data in Marine Recreational Fishing Models: A New Site Aggregation Approach," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258276, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Pilli, Luis & Swait, Joffre & Mazzon, José Afonso, 2022. "Jeopardizing brand profitability by misattributing process heterogeneity to preference heterogeneity," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    20. W. Shaw & Michael Ozog, 1999. "Modeling Overnight Recreation Trip Choice: Application of a Repeated Nested Multinomial Logit Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(4), pages 397-414, June.

    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:jeeman:v:81:y:2017:i:c:p:152-173. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622870 .

    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.