IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v42y2009i3p279-295.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mixed Logit Model Performance and Distributional Assumptions: Preferences and GM foods

Author

Listed:
  • Dan Rigby

    ()

  • Kelvin Balcombe

    ()

  • Michael Burton

    ()

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Dan Rigby & Kelvin Balcombe & Michael Burton, 2009. "Mixed Logit Model Performance and Distributional Assumptions: Preferences and GM foods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 42(3), pages 279-295, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:42:y:2009:i:3:p:279-295
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-008-9227-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10640-008-9227-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, March.
    2. Train, K. & Weeks, M., 2004. "Discrete Choice Models in Preference Space and Willingness-to Pay Space," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0443, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    3. Andrew A. Goett & Kathleen Hudson & Kenneth E. Train, 2000. "Customers' Choice Among Retail Energy Suppliers: The Willingness-to-Pay for Service Attributes," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 1-28.
    4. Burton, Michael P. & Rigby, Dan, 2006. "Non-Participation in Choice Models: Hurdle and Latent Class Models," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25312, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    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. Balcombe, Kelvin & Burton, Michael & Rigby, Dan, 2011. "Skew and attribute non-attendance within the Bayesian mixed logit model," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 446-461.
    2. repec:sss:wpaper:201407 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Takama, Takeshi & Tsephel, Stanzin & Johnson, Francis X., 2012. "Evaluating the relative strength of product-specific factors in fuel switching and stove choice decisions in Ethiopia. A discrete choice model of household preferences for clean cooking alternatives," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1763-1773.
    4. Yuan, Yuan & You, Wen & Boyle, Kevin J., 2015. "A guide to heterogeneity features captured by parametric and nonparametric mixing distributions for the mixed logit model," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205733, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association;Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Cati Torres & Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley, 2014. "Incorrectly accounting for preference heterogeneity in choice experiments: what are the implications for welfare measurement?," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2014-07, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    6. Rouwendal, Jan & de Blaeij, Arianne & Rietveld, Piet & Verhoef, Erik, 2010. "The information content of a stated choice experiment: A new method and its application to the value of a statistical life," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 136-151, January.
    7. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny & Hynes, Stephen & van Rensburg, Tom M., 2011. "The effect of using labelled alternatives in stated choice experiments: an exploration focusing on farmland walking trails in Ireland," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108792, Agricultural Economics Society.
    8. Janssen, Meike & Hamm, Ulrich, 2014. "Governmental and private certification labels for organic food: Consumer attitudes and preferences in Germany," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P2), pages 437-448.
    9. Gillespie, Rob & Kragt, Marit E., 2012. "Accounting for Nonmarket Impacts in a Benefit-Cost Analysis of Underground Coal Mining in New South Wales, Australia," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(02), pages 1-29, May.
    10. Domanski, Adam, 2009. "Estimating Mixed Logit Recreation Demand Models With Large Choice Sets," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49413, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Fosgerau, Mogens & Hess, Stephane, 2009. "A comparison of methods for representing random taste heterogeneity in discrete choice models," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 42, pages 1-25.
    12. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2013. "Confidence intervals of willingness-to-pay for random coefficient logit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 199-214.
    13. Janssen, Meike & Hamm, Ulrich, 2011. "Certification Logos in the Market for Organic Food: What are Consumers Willing to Pay for Different Logos?," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114454, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Mixed logit; Bayesian; GM; Marginal likelihood; WTO; C11; C25; C52; Q51;

    JEL classification:

    • C11 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Bayesian Analysis: General
    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    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:kap:enreec:v:42:y:2009:i:3:p:279-295. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.