IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2008.74.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Preferences of Trieste Inhabitants for the Re-use of the Old Port: A Conjoint Choice Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Jérôme Massiani

    (University of Trieste)

  • Paolo Rosato

    (University of Trieste)

Abstract

In many developed countries, abandoned (derelict or underused) industrial areas often occupy important parts of the cities. This raises issues about the possibilities of reusing these areas as well as on the conservation of industrial heritage they often entail. Conjoint Analysis (CA) can shed light on these issues as it can elicit the preferences of inhabitants for different scenarios of reuse. So far, only a limited number of applications of CA have been made on this topic. In this article, we present the results of a CA experiment on the reuse of a large, mainly abandoned, port area in Trieste (Italy) featuring buildings with some historical and industrial heritage value. Three hundred computer assisted interviews have been made on a representative sample of Trieste inhabitants, eliciting their preferences for different reuse hypotheses and building conservation scenarios. The survey explores two original topics: the impact of the time horizon of the payment (single or decennial special purpose tax) and the consideration of various mixes of future uses. The collected data have been processed using latent class and mixed logit models to explore heterogeneity among interviewees' preferences. Our findings show that, while preferences clearly emerge in favor of tourism and leisure oriented uses, preferences in terms of conservation and the impact of cost are much more difficult to measure. This difficulty persists even when specified or non specified heterogeneity is taken into account, although Mixed Logit estimate provides more convincing results.

Suggested Citation

  • Jérôme Massiani & Paolo Rosato, 2008. "The Preferences of Trieste Inhabitants for the Re-use of the Old Port: A Conjoint Choice Experiment," Working Papers 2008.74, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2008.74
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://feem-media.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/NDL2008-074.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ståle Navrud & Richard C. Ready (ed.), 2002. "Valuing Cultural Heritage," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1759.
    2. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    3. Boter, Jaap & Rouwendal, Jan & Wedel, Michel, 2004. "Employing Travel Costs to Compare the Use Value of Competing Cultural Organizations," Serie Research Memoranda 0011, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    4. Edward Morey & Kathleen Greer Rossmann, 2003. "Using Stated-Preference Questions to Investigate Variations in Willingness to Pay for Preserving Marble Monuments: Classic Heterogeneity, Random Parameters, and Mixture Models," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 27(3), pages 215-229, November.
    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. Figini, Paolo & Vici, Laura, 2012. "Off-season tourists and the cultural offer of a mass-tourism destination: The case of Rimini," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 825-839.
    2. Martin F. Quaas & Sjak Smulders, 2008. "Pollution and the Efficiency of Urban Growth," Working Papers 2008.75, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    3. Massimiliano Castellani & Pierpaolo Pattitoni & Laura Vici, 2015. "Pricing Visitor Preferences for Temporary Art Exhibitions," Tourism Economics, , vol. 21(1), pages 83-103, February.

    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. Massiani, Jerome & Rosato, Paolo, 2008. "Using conjoint analysis to investigate preferences of inhabitants for the future of a greyfield area: an application to the Old Port in Trieste," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 39, pages 59-81.
    2. Moore, Rebecca, 2008. "Using Attitudes to Characterize Heterogeneous Preferences," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6488, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. David Throsby & Anita Zednik & Jorge E. Araña, 2021. "Public preferences for heritage conservation strategies: a choice modelling approach," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 45(3), pages 333-358, September.
    4. Choi, Andy S. & Fielding, Kelly S., 2013. "Environmental attitudes as WTP predictors: A case study involving endangered species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 24-32.
    5. Andy Choi & Franco Papandrea & Jeff Bennett, 2007. "Assessing cultural values: developing an attitudinal scale," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 31(4), pages 311-335, December.
    6. Kikulwe, Enoch M. & Birol, Ekin & Wesseler, Justus & Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin, 2013. "Benefits, costs, and consumer perceptions of the potential introduction of a fungus-resistant banana in Uganda and policy implications," IFPRI book chapters, in: Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin & Gruère, Guillaume P. & Sithole-Niang, Idah (ed.), Genetically modified crops in Africa: Economic and policy lessons from countries south of the Sahara, chapter 4, pages 99-141, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Chhandita Das & Christopher M. Anderson & Stephen K. Swallow, 2009. "Estimating Distributions of Willingness to Pay for Heterogeneous Populations," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 75(3), pages 593-610, January.
    8. Chr. Hjorth-Andersen, 2004. "The Danish Cultural Heritage: Economics and Politics," Discussion Papers 04-33, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    9. Jaap Boter & Jan Rouwendal & Michel Wedel, 2005. "Employing Travel Time to Compare the Value of Competing Cultural Organizations," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 29(1), pages 19-33, February.
    10. Aleksandra Wiśniewska & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2015. "Utilizing the Discrete Choice Experiment Approach for Designing a Socially Efficient Cultural Policy: The case of municipal theaters in Warsaw," Working Papers 2015-36, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    11. Halkos, George & Galani, Georgia, 2016. "Assessing willingness to pay for marine and coastal ecosystems: A Case Study in Greece," MPRA Paper 68767, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Dias, Vitor & Belcher, Ken, 2015. "Value and provision of ecosystem services from prairie wetlands: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 35-44.
    13. Ugo Colombino & Annamaria Nese, 2009. "Preference Heterogeneity in Relation to Museum Services," Tourism Economics, , vol. 15(2), pages 381-395, June.
    14. Mat Alipiah, Roseliza & Anang, Zuraini & Abdul Rashid, Noorhaslinda Kulub & Smart, James C. R. & Wan Ibrahim, Wan Noorwatie, 2018. "Aquaculturists Preference Heterogeneity towards Wetland Ecosystem Services: A Latent Class Discrete Choice Model," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 52(2), pages 253-266.
    15. Pepermans, Guido, 2014. "Valuing smart meters," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 280-294.
    16. Pepermans, Guido, 2011. "The value of continuous power supply for Flemish households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7853-7864.
    17. Birol, Ekin & Karousakis, Katia & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2006. "Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes: The case of Cheimaditida wetland in Greece," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 145-156, November.
    18. Angel Bujosa & Antoni Riera & Robert Hicks, 2010. "Combining Discrete and Continuous Representations of Preference Heterogeneity: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(4), pages 477-493, December.
    19. Ugo Colombino & Annamaria Nese & Patrizia Riganti, 2005. "Eliciting Public Preferences For Managing Cultural Heritage," Public Economics 0501004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Patrizia Riganti & Annamaria Nese & Ugo Colombino, 2004. "Eliciting Public Preferences For Managing Cultural Heritage Sites: Evidence from a Case study on the Temples Of Paestum," ERSA conference papers ersa04p437, European Regional Science Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Land Use; Port; Trieste; Conjoint Analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • R52 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Land Use and Other Regulations
    • R10 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - General

    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:fem:femwpa:2008.74. 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: Alberto Prina Cerai (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.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.