IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cns/cnscwp/200012.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluation of likelihood based tests for non-nested dichotomus choice contingent valuation models

Author

Listed:
  • M. Genius
  • E. Strazzera

Abstract

Distributional assumptions are crucial in the estimation of the value of public projects assessed by means of contingent valuations analyses, and it would seem obvious that tests for model specification should play an important part in the statistical analysis. It can be observed, though, that when the competing hypotheses are non nested, the choice of the model is often based on heuristic grounds, or, at most, on deterministic selection model criteria such as Akaike s (1973). In this paper we study two alternative, probabilistic, approaches to checking model specification, that, like Akaike s, are based on the Kullback-Leibler Information Criterion (KLIC) - the model selection testing proposed by Vuong (1989) and the non nested model test proposed by Cox, in the simulated approach of Pesaran and Pesaran (1993). The three approaches are confronted by comparing their performance in selecting among different contingent valuation models applied to simulated data. Our preliminary results seem to warrant the use of Vuong s test, complemented in same cases by the application of the Cox test.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Genius & E. Strazzera, 2000. "Evaluation of likelihood based tests for non-nested dichotomus choice contingent valuation models," Working Paper CRENoS 200012, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
  • Handle: RePEc:cns:cnscwp:200012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://crenos.unica.it/crenos/node/156
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://crenos.unica.it/crenos/sites/default/files/wp/00-12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G, 1981. "Several Tests for Model Specification in the Presence of Alternative Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 781-793, May.
    2. Hashem Pesaran, M. & Pesaran, Bahram, 1993. "A simulation approach to the problem of computing Cox's statistic for testing nonnested models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1-3), pages 377-392.
    3. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 1988. "A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 355-379, September.
    4. Pesaran, M. H. & Weeks, M., 1999. "Non-nested Hypothesis Testing: An Overview," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 9918, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    5. Granger, Clive W. J. & King, Maxwell L. & White, Halbert, 1995. "Comments on testing economic theories and the use of model selection criteria," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 173-187, May.
    6. Gourieroux,Christian & Monfort,Alain, 1995. "Statistics and Econometric Models," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521405515.
    7. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    8. Cameron, Trudy Ann & James, Michelle D, 1987. "Efficient Estimation Methods for "Closed-ended' Contingent Valuation Surveys," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(2), pages 269-276, May.
    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. R. Naylor, 2001. "Industry profits and market size under bilateral oligopoly," Working Paper CRENoS 200108, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    2. Hilger, James & Hanemann, Michael, 2006. "Heterogeneous Preferences for Water Quality: A Finite Mixture Model of Beach Recreation in Southern California," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt0565c0b2, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    3. R. Naylor, 2001. "Firm profits and the number of firms under unionised oligopoly," Working Paper CRENoS 200109, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.

    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. Genius, Margarita & Strazzera, Elisabetta, 2002. "A note about model selection and tests for non-nested contingent valuation models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 363-370, February.
    2. Luis Orea & David Roibás & Alan Wall, 2004. "Choosing the Technical Efficiency Orientation to Analyze Firms' Technology: A Model Selection Test Approach," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 51-71, July.
    3. Mur, Jesús & Angulo, Ana, 2009. "Model selection strategies in a spatial setting: Some additional results," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 200-213, March.
    4. Otsu, Taisuke & Whang, Yoon-Jae, 2011. "Testing For Nonnested Conditional Moment Restrictions Via Conditional Empirical Likelihood," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 114-153, February.
    5. McAleer, Michael, 1995. "The significance of testing empirical non-nested models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 149-171, May.
    6. J. M. C. Santos Silva, 2001. "A score test for non-nested hypotheses with applications to discrete data models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(5), pages 577-597.
    7. Carlos E. Carpio & Olga Isengildina-Massa, 2016. "Does Government-sponsored Advertising Increase Social Welfare? A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 239-259.
    8. Heinz König & Michael Lechner, 1994. "Some Recent Developments in Microeconometrics - A Survey," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 130(III), pages 299-331, September.
    9. Hanemann, W. Michael & Kanninen, Barbara, 1996. "The Statistical Analysis Of Discrete-Response Cv Data," CUDARE Working Papers 25022, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    10. Christophe Bontemps & Grayham E. Mizon, 2008. "Encompassing: Concepts and Implementation," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 70(s1), pages 721-750, December.
    11. Carpio, Carlos E. & Mathews, Leah G. & Boonsaeng, Tullaya & Perrett, Allison & Descieux, Katie, 2015. "Evaluating the Marketing Impact of a Regional Branding Program Using Contingent Valuation Methods: The Case of the Appalachian Grown™ Branding Program," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205800, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Silva João M. C. Santos & Tenreyro Silvana & Windmeijer Frank, 2015. "Testing Competing Models for Non-negative Data with Many Zeros," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Wiktor Adamowicz & Mark Dickie & Shelby Gerking & Marcella Veronesi & David Zinner, 2014. "Household Decision Making and Valuation of Environmental Health Risks to Parents and Their Children," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(4), pages 481-519.
    14. Yoonae Jo, 2001. "Does college education nourish egoism?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 4(2), pages 115-128, September.
    15. Tumusiime, Emmanuel & B. Wade, Brorsen & Mosali, Jagadeesh & Johnson, Jim & Locke, James & Biermacher, Jon T., 2011. "Determining Optimal Levels of Nitrogen Fertilizer Using Random Parameter Models," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(4), pages 541-552, November.
    16. Corsi, Alessandro & Novelli, Silvia, 2016. "The value of the participation in Solidarity Purchasing Groups (SPGs): an empirical analysis in Piedmont," 2016 Fifth AIEAA Congress, June 16-17, 2016, Bologna, Italy 242305, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    17. Kwak, So-Yoon & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2015. "The public’s value for developing ocean energy technology in the Republic of Korea: A contingent valuation study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 432-439.
    18. Wilson, Jeffrey J. & Lantz, Van A. & MacLean, David A., 2010. "A benefit-cost analysis of establishing protected natural areas in New Brunswick, Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 94-103, February.
    19. Kapetanios, G. & Weeks, M., 2003. "Non-nested Models and the likelihood Ratio Statistic: A Comparison of Simulation and Bootstrap-based Tests," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0308, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    20. Yoonae Jo, 2001. "Does college education nourish egoism?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 4(2), pages 115-128, June.

    More about this item

    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:cns:cnscwp:200012. 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: CRENoS (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crenoit.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.