IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/een/eenhrr/0807.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Exploring Scope and Scale Issues in Choice Modelling Design

Author

Listed:
  • John Rolfe

    (Regional Development Economics, Faculty of Business and Informatics, Central Queensland University, Australia)

  • Wang Xuehong

    (Centre for Environmental Management, Central Queensland University, Australia)

Abstract

The key tasks in the design of a choice modelling (CM) experiment are to define the scope, scale and frame of the tradeoffs presented to respondents. This study explores the scale and scope of choice tasks and then develops definitions of these terms. The scope of a good in a stated preference experiment refers to the dimensions used to define the good as well as the tradeoffs involved. The scale refers to the quantities involved. The framing refers to the context in which the choices are made. The discussion helps identify issues when setting the contingent market for a choice experiment.

Suggested Citation

  • John Rolfe & Wang Xuehong, 2008. "Exploring Scope and Scale Issues in Choice Modelling Design," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0807, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    • Handle: RePEc:een:eenhrr:0807
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/pdf/EERH_RR7.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Bueren, Martin & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2004. "Towards the development of a transferable set of value estimates for environmental attributes," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(01), pages 1-32.
    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. Cleland, Jonelle & McCartney, Abbie, 2010. "Putting the Spotlight on Attribute Definition: Divergence Between Experts and the Public," Research Reports 107576, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.

    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. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2010. "Do values for protecting iconic assets vary across populations? A Great Barrier Reef case study," Research Reports 95054, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    2. Kasia Mazur & Jeff Bennett, 2009. "Location differences in communities’ preferences for environmental improvements in selected NSW catchments: A Choice Modelling approach," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0921, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    3. Concu, Giovanni B., 2007. "Investigating distance effects on environmental values: a choice modelling approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(2), pages 1-20.
    4. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2008. "Testing for differences in benefit transfer values between state and regional frameworks," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(2), pages 1-20.
    5. Legg, Peter & Hatton MacDonald, Darla & Bark, Rosalind H. & Tocock, Mark & Tinch, Dugald & Rose, John M., 2020. "Cultural Values, Deep Mining Operations and the Use of Surplus Groundwater for Towns, Landscapes and Jobs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    6. John Rolfe & Jill Windle, 2010. "Assessing national values to protect the health of the Great Barrier Reef," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1072, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    7. John Rolfe & Jill Windle, 2010. "Do values for protecting iconic assets vary across populations? A Great Barrier Reef case study," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1065, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    8. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John & Brouwer, Roy, 2009. "Public values for improved water security for domestic and environmental use," Research Reports 94818, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    9. Bergstrom, John C. & Taylor, Laura O., 2006. "Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: Theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 351-360, December.
    10. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2013. "The limitations of applying benefit transfer to assess the value of ecosystem services in a “generic” peri-urban, coastal town in Australia," 2013 Conference (57th), February 5-8, 2013, Sydney, Australia 152183, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    11. Johnston, Robert J. & Ramachandran, Mahesh & Schultz, Eric T. & Segerson, Kathleen & Besedin, Elena Y., 2011. "Characterizing Spatial Pattern in Ecosystem Service Values when Distance Decay Doesn’t Apply: Choice Experiments and Local Indicators of Spatial Association," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103374, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Schaafsma, Marije & Brouwer, Roy & Rose, John, 2012. "Directional heterogeneity in WTP models for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 21-31.
    13. Rolfe, John & Loch, Adam & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2002. "Framing effects and benefit transfer in the Fitzroy basin," 2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra, Australia 174038, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    14. Neville D Crossman & Jeffrey D Connor & Brett A Bryan & David A Summers & John Ginnivan, 2009. "Reconfiguring an Irrigation Landscape to Improve Provision of Ecosystem Services," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2009-07, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    15. Kragt, Marit Ellen, "undated". "Evidence-based Research in Environmental Choice Experiments," Working Papers 153335, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    16. Black, Andrew & Colombo, Sergio & Hanley, Nick & Tinch, Dugald & Aftab, Ashar & Bergmann, E. Ariel, 2006. "Transferring the Benefits of Water Quality Enhancements in Small Catchments," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25790, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Rolfe, John & Brouwer, Roy, 2011. "Testing for value stability with a meta-analysis of choice experiments: River health in Australia," Research Reports 107744, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    18. Crossman, Neville D. & Connor, Jeffrey D. & Bryan, Brett A. & Summers, David M. & Ginnivan, John, 2010. "Reconfiguring an irrigation landscape to improve provision of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1031-1042, March.
    19. Dyack, Brenda & Connor, Jeffery D. & Hatton MacDonald, Darla, 2005. "Screening options and setting priorities for River Murray floodplains," 2005 Conference (49th), February 9-11, 2005, Coff's Harbour, Australia 137858, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    20. Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2005. "Australasian environmental economics: contributions, conflicts and ‘cop-outs’," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(3), pages 1-19.

    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:een:eenhrr:0807. 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: CAP Web Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/asanuau.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.