IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nse/ecosta/ecostat_2021_524d_5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preferences of the French Population Regarding Access to Genetic Information: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Christine Peyron
  • Aurore Pélissier
  • Nicolas Krucien

Abstract

[eng] This study analyses the preferences of the French population with regard to the genetic information that is potentially accessible thanks to genomic medicine. More specifically, it is a question of knowing whether or not the French population (i) is in favour of knowing all possible results with regard to genetic predispositions; (ii) has preferences with regard to the person or the method that would decide upon the list of accessible results; (iii) is in favour of researchers having access to patients’ genetic data. This study makes use of the discrete choice method, with an online survey, conducted in France with a representative sample of 2,501 respondents. The choice data were analyzed in a mixed logit model, to explore the variability of preferences. The results show a preference for autonomy in choosing the information communicated, to access the most comprehensive genetic results possible and for a contribution to research through the provision of genetic data.

Suggested Citation

  • Christine Peyron & Aurore Pélissier & Nicolas Krucien, 2021. "Preferences of the French Population Regarding Access to Genetic Information: A Discrete Choice Experiment," Economie et Statistique / Economics and Statistics, Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques (INSEE), issue 524-525, pages 65-84.
    • Handle: RePEc:nse:ecosta:ecostat_2021_524d_5
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.24187/ecostat.2021.524d.2044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.insee.fr/en/statistiques/fichier/5396136/05_ES524-524_Peyron_et_al_EN.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.24187/ecostat.2021.524d.2044?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    2. Scaccia, Luisa & Marcucci, Edoardo & Gatta, Valerio, 2023. "Prediction and confidence intervals of willingness-to-pay for mixed logit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 54-78.
    3. Hasan-Basri, Bakti & Mohd Mustafa, Muzafarshah & Bakar, Normizan, 2019. "Are Malaysian Consumers Willing to Pay for Hybrid Cars’ Attributes?," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 53(1), pages 121-134.
    4. Isler, Cassiano Augusto & Blumenfeld, Marcelo & Caldeira, Gabriel Pereira & Roberts, Clive, 2024. "Long-Distance railway mode choice in Brazil: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    5. Nthambi, Mary & Wätzold, Frank & Markova-Nenova, Nonka, 2018. "Quantifying benefit losses from poor governance of climate change adaptation projects: A discrete choice experiment with farmers in Kenya," MPRA Paper 94678, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Rigal, Stanislas & Calvet, Coralie & Tardieu, Léa & Roussel, Sébastien & Vaissière, Anne-Charlotte, 2025. "The hidden dimension of low-carbon public transport policies: From biodiversity conservation to user preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    7. Rommel, Kai & Sagebiel, Julian, 2017. "Preferences for micro-cogeneration in Germany: Policy implications for grid expansion from a discrete choice experiment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 612-622.
    8. Mara Hammerle & Paul Crosby & Rohan Best, 2021. "Super‐sizing Renewable Energy Investment: Examining the Portfolio Preferences of Superannuation Fund Members," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 97(317), pages 267-284, June.
    9. Nasrin Tayyari Dehbarez & Morten Raun Mørkbak & Dorte Gyrd-Hansen & Niels Uldbjerg & Rikke Søgaard, 2018. "Women’s Preferences for Birthing Hospital in Denmark: A Discrete Choice Experiment," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(6), pages 613-624, December.
    10. Rodrigo J. Tapia & Gerard Jong & Ana M. Larranaga & Helena B. Bettella Cybis, 2021. "Exploring Multiple‐discreteness in Freight Transport. A Multiple Discrete Extreme Value Model Application for Grain Consolidators in Argentina," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 581-608, September.
    11. Daziano, Ricardo A. & Achtnicht, Martin, 2014. "Accounting for uncertainty in willingness to pay for environmental benefits," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 166-177.
    12. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Guariguata, Manuel R. & Sumaila, Ussif Rashid, 2016. "Estimating demand for certification of forest ecosystem services: A choice experiment with Forest Stewardship Council certificate holders," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 193-201.
    13. Maciej Sobolewski & Michał Paliński, 2017. "How much consumers value on-line privacy? Welfare assessment of new data protection regulation (GDPR)," Working Papers 2017-17, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    14. Shi, Wei & Halstead, John M. & Huang, Ju-Chin, 2017. "Market Experience Matters: Status Quo Effect in the Economic Valuation of Consumer Preferences for Local Produce," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258290, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Perolia, Daniel R. & Collart, Alba J. & Yehouenou, Lauriane, 2016. "Consumer Preferences for Delacata Catfish: A Choice Experiment with Tasting," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 47(3), pages 1-17, November.
    16. Martin Achtnicht & Daniel Osberghaus, 2019. "The Demand for Index‐Based Flood Insurance in a High‐Income Country," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 20(2), pages 217-242, May.
    17. Obermeyer, Andy & Treiber, Martin & Evangelinos, Christos, 2015. "On the identification of thresholds in travel choice modelling," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 1-9.
    18. Miller, Sini & Tait, Peter & Saunders, Caroline, 2015. "Estimating indigenous cultural values of freshwater: A choice experiment approach to Māori values in New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 207-214.
    19. Liu, Yun & Kong, Qingxia & de Bekker-Grob, Esther W., 2019. "Public preferences for health care facilities in rural China: A discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 237(C), pages 1-1.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:nse:ecosta:ecostat_2021_524d_5. 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: Veronique Egloff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inseefr.html .

    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.