IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transb/v46y2012i9p1177-1201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linking discrete choice to continuous demand within the framework of a computable general equilibrium model

Author

Listed:
  • Truong, Truong P.
  • Hensher, David A.

Abstract

Discrete choice (DC) models are commonly used as basic building blocks in ‘bottom-up’ models which seek to describe consumer and producer behaviour at a disaggregate level, in contrast to continuous demand (CD) models which are used to describe behaviour at a more aggregate level. At a disaggregate level, choice behaviour is defined in terms of commodities differentiated by qualities or attributes. In contrast, aggregate demand behaviour is defined in terms of broadly defined and generically different commodities. In a DC model, the main focus of analysis is not the total quantity of demand, but rather the relative shares or substitution between the choice alternatives, in contrast to a continuous demand model where the focus is on the aggregate substitution between groups of commodities as well as on the income effects. Seen in this way, there is scope for complementary usage of DC and CD models within the framework of a CGE model where DC models are used to describe the preferences for a narrowly defined set of commodities belonging to a particular sector of an economy, and CD models are used to describe the interactions between these sectors. In this paper, we describe how DC and CD models can be used in such an integrated fashion in a spatial computable general equilibrium model to inquire into the wider economic impacts of a transport investment project in the Sydney Metropolitan Area.

Suggested Citation

  • Truong, Truong P. & Hensher, David A., 2012. "Linking discrete choice to continuous demand within the framework of a computable general equilibrium model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1177-1201.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:46:y:2012:i:9:p:1177-1201
    DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2012.06.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191261512000859
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.trb.2012.06.001?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. Schmidheiny, Kurt & Brülhart, Marius, 2011. "On the equivalence of location choice models: Conditional logit, nested logit and Poisson," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 214-222, March.
    2. Roger Vickerman, 2007. "Recent Evolution of Research into the Wider Economic Benefits of Transport Infrastructure Investments," OECD/ITF Joint Transport Research Centre Discussion Papers 2007/9, OECD Publishing.
    3. Steven Berry & James Levinsohn & Ariel Pakes, 2004. "Differentiated Products Demand Systems from a Combination of Micro and Macro Data: The New Car Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(1), pages 68-105, February.
    4. Philip E. T. Lewis & Garry MacDonald, 2002. "The Elasticity of Demand for Labour in Australia," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 78(240), pages 18-30, March.
    5. Smith, Brett & Abdoolakhan, Zeenat & Taplin, John, 2010. "Demand and choice elasticities for a separable product group," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 134-136, August.
    6. Simon P. Anderson & André De Palma & Jacques-François Thisse, 1989. "Demand for Differentiated Products, Discrete Choice Models, and the Characteristics Approach," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 56(1), pages 21-35.
    7. David C. Maré & Daniel J. Graham, 2009. "Agglomeration Elasticities in New Zealand," Working Papers 09_06, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    8. Anderson, Simon Peter & de Palma, Andre & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1988. "A Representative Consumer Theory of the Logit Model," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 29(3), pages 461-466, August.
    9. Anthony J. Venables, 2007. "Evaluating Urban Transport Improvements: Cost-Benefit Analysis in the Presence of Agglomeration and Income Taxation," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 41(2), pages 173-188, May.
    10. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    11. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, October.
    12. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    13. Anderson, Simon P. & de Palma, Andre & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1988. "The CES and the logit : Two related models of heterogeneity," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 155-164, February.
    14. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    15. Daniel J. Graham, 2007. "Agglomeration, Productivity and Transport Investment," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 41(3), pages 317-343, September.
    16. Jara-Díaz, Sergio R. & Videla, Jorge, 1989. "Detection of income effect in mode choice: Theory and application," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 393-400, December.
    17. Graham, Daniel J., 2007. "Variable returns to agglomeration and the effect of road traffic congestion," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 103-120, July.
    18. Horridge, Mark, 1994. "A computable general equilibrium model of urban transport demands," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 427-457, August.
    19. William Greene & David Hensher, 2010. "Does scale heterogeneity across individuals matter? An empirical assessment of alternative logit models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 413-428, May.
    20. Mohring, Herbert, 1993. "Maximizing, measuring, and not double counting transportation-improvement benefits: A primer on closed- and open-economy cost-benefit analysis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 413-424, December.
    21. Francisco J. Martínez & Claudio A. Araya, 2000. "A Note on Trip Benefits in Spatial Interaction Models," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 789-796, November.
    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. Lee, Jeongeun & Koo, Yoonmo, 2023. "A general equilibrium analysis of individual choice behavior on alternative fuel vehicles," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PB).
    2. Khandker Habib, 2015. "An investigation on mode choice and travel distance demand of older people in the National Capital Region (NCR) of Canada: application of a utility theoretic joint econometric model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 143-161, January.
    3. Le, Henry & Gurry, Finn & Lennox, James, 2023. "An application of land use, transport, and economy interaction model," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    4. Robson, Edward N. & Wijayaratna, Kasun P. & Dixit, Vinayak V., 2018. "A review of computable general equilibrium models for transport and their applications in appraisal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 31-53.
    5. Edward N. Robson & Vinayak V. Dixit, 2017. "A General Equilibrium Framework for Integrated Assessment of Transport and Economic Impacts," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 989-1013, September.
    6. Greiner, Romy & Bliemer, Michiel & Ballweg, Julie, 2014. "Design considerations of a choice experiment to estimate likely participation by north Australian pastoralists in contractual biodiversity conservation," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 34-45.
    7. Truong, Truong P. & Hensher, David A., 2014. "Linking discrete choice to continuous demand in a spatial computable general equilibrium model," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 21-46.
    8. Greiner, Romy & Ballweg, Julie, 2013. "Estimating the supply of on-farm biodiversity conservation services by north Australian pastoralists: design of a choice experiment," 2013 Conference (57th), February 5-8, 2013, Sydney, Australia 152153, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    9. Hensher, David A. & Truong, Truong P. & Mulley, Corinne & Ellison, Richard, 2012. "Assessing the wider economy impacts of transport infrastructure investment with an illustrative application to the North-West Rail Link project in Sydney, Australia," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 292-305.
    10. David Hensher & Richard Ellison & Corinne Mulley, 2014. "Assessing the employment agglomeration and social accessibility impacts of high speed rail in Eastern Australia," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 463-493, May.

    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. Truong, Truong P. & Hensher, David A., 2014. "Linking discrete choice to continuous demand in a spatial computable general equilibrium model," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 21-46.
    2. Lee Branstetter & Chirantan Chatterjee & Matthew J. Higgins, 2016. "Regulation and welfare: evidence from paragraph IV generic entry in the pharmaceutical industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(4), pages 857-890, November.
    3. Pereira, Pedro & Ribeiro, Tiago, 2011. "The impact on broadband access to the Internet of the dual ownership of telephone and cable networks," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 283-293, March.
    4. Lapo Filistrucchi & Tobias J. Klein, 2013. "Price Competition in Two-Sided Markets with Heterogeneous Consumers and Network Effects," Working Papers 13-20, NET Institute.
    5. Pierre Dubois & Rachel Griffith & Martin O'Connell, 2020. "How Well Targeted Are Soda Taxes?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(11), pages 3661-3704, November.
    6. Roy Allen & John Rehbeck, 2020. "Identification of Random Coefficient Latent Utility Models," Papers 2003.00276, arXiv.org.
    7. Rachel Griffith & Lars Nesheim & Martin O'Connell, 2018. "Income effects and the welfare consequences of tax in differentiated product oligopoly," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), pages 305-341, March.
    8. Jan De Loecker & Paul T. Scott, 2016. "Estimating market power Evidence from the US Brewing Industry," NBER Working Papers 22957, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. André de Palma & Julien Monardo, 2017. "The General Nesting Logit (GNL) Model using Aggregate Data," Working Papers hal-01552455, HAL.
    10. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2007. "Discrete Choice Models With Multiple Unobserved Choice Characteristics," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(4), pages 1159-1192, November.
    11. Gian Maria Tomat, 2005. "Prices, Product Differentiation And Quality Measurement: A Comparison Between Hedonic And Matched Model Methods," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 547, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    12. Kanemoto, Yoshitsugu, 2013. "Second-best cost–benefit analysis in monopolistic competition models of urban agglomeration," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 83-92.
    13. Eivind Tveter, 2021. "Transport network improvements: The effects on wage earnings," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 478-491, June.
    14. Paul Scott, 2017. "Estimating Market Power: Evidence from the US Brewing Industry," 2017 Meeting Papers 389, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    15. Martin S. Gaynor & Samuel A. Kleiner & William B. Vogt, 2013. "A Structural Approach to Market Definition With an Application to the Hospital Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 243-289, June.
    16. Eliasson, Jonas & Fosgerau, Mogens, 2019. "Cost-benefit analysis of transport improvements in the presence of spillovers, matching and an income tax," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 1-9.
    17. Mogens Fosgerau & Julien Monardo & André de Palma, 2019. "The Inverse Product Differentiation Logit Model," Working Papers hal-02183411, HAL.
    18. Inha Oh & Jeong-Dong Lee & Seogwon Hwang & Almas Heshmati, 2010. "Analysis of product efficiency in the Korean automobile market from a consumer’s perspective," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 119-137, February.
    19. Rachel Griffith & Martin O'Connell & Kate Smith, 2017. "Design of optimal corrective taxes in the alcohol market," IFS Working Papers W17/02, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    20. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).

    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:transb:v:46:y:2012:i:9:p:1177-1201. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/548/description#description .

    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.