IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crs/wpaper/2012-02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How to Deal with Protest Bids and Preference for the Status Quo in Choice Experiments ?

Author

Listed:
  • Julie Poirier

    () (CREST)

Abstract

This paper deals with the protest bids issue in choice experiments. In the context of the Water Framework Directive, we examined local residents' preferences for water quality improvements at a specific river basin in France. We used the choice experiment method with site-specific attributes referring to the four sites that compose our basin. We first estimated a random parameters logit model in order to take into account heterogeneity of preferences. We found positive willingness-to-pay for improvements in water quality. Moreover we observed that a significant proportion of respondents always chose the status quo scenario (which referred to the current management regime and was associated with a zero price) irrespective of the choice set she was presented. Status quo responses are considered as being zero bids and may be categorized into two types: true zero bids, where the respondent really places a zero value on the good, and protest bids, where the respondent states a zero willingness-topay even though her true value for the good is positive. We excluded protest bids from the analysis and re-estimated our random parameters logit model. Results showed that protest bids do affect the outcome. In order to take into account the existence of the two types of zero bids when estimating willingness-to-pay, we then proposed a cross-nested logit model. Implicit prices obtained from this model estimation are larger than those obtained from the random parameters logit model estimation. As a result, the cross-nested logit model allows taking into consideration the peculiarity of protest behaviors

Suggested Citation

  • Julie Poirier, 2012. "How to Deal with Protest Bids and Preference for the Status Quo in Choice Experiments ?," Working Papers 2012-02, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
  • Handle: RePEc:crs:wpaper:2012-02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://crest.science/RePEc/wpstorage/2012-02.pdf
    File Function: Crest working paper version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blamey, Russell K. & Gordon, Jenny & Chapman, Ross, 1999. "Choice modelling: assessing the environmental values of water supply options," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 43(3), September.
    2. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
    3. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2001. "Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 179-192, March.
    4. Abbe, E. & Bierlaire, M. & Toledo, T., 2007. "Normalization and correlation of cross-nested logit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 795-808, August.
    5. Swait, Joffre & Adamowicz, Wiktor, 2001. " The Influence of Task Complexity on Consumer Choice: A Latent Class Model of Decision Strategy Switching," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 135-148, June.
    6. Farber, Stephen & Griner, Brian, 2000. "Valuing watershed quality improvements using conjoint analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 63-76, July.
    7. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    8. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(8), pages 827-840.
    9. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, May.
    10. Wen, Chieh-Hua & Koppelman, Frank S., 2001. "The generalized nested logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 627-641, August.
    11. Kosz, Michael, 1996. "Valuing riverside wetlands: the case of the "Donau-Auen" national park," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 109-127, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Choice experiments; Cross-nested logit model; Protest bids; Water Framework Directive; Water quality;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:crs:wpaper:2012-02. 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: (Sri Srikandan). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/crestfr.html .

    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.