IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Relaxing the IIA Assumption in Locational Choice Models: A Comparison Between Conditional Logit, Mixed Logit, and Multinomial Probit Models


  • Dahlberg, Matz

    () (Department of Economics)

  • Eklöf, Matias

    () (Department of Economics)


This paper estimates a locational choice model to assess the demand for local public services, using a data set where individuals chooses between 26 municipalities within a local labor market. We assess the importance of the IIA assumption by comparing the predictions of three difference models; the conditional logit (CL) model, the mixed logit (MXL) model, and the multinomial probit (MNP) model. Our main finding is that a MXL or a MNP estimator leads to exactly the same conclusions as the traditional CL estimator. That is, given the data used here, the IIA assumption, and hence the use of a CL estimator, seems to be valid when estimating Tiebout-related migration. The only instance when we get somewhat different results when using the MXL or MNP estimator compared with the CL estimator is when we have a too parsimonious model. One possible hypothesis explaining this result is that omitted variables are captured by the distribution parameters of the coeffcients of the included variables, leading to the false conclusion that the coefficients are not fixed. This hypothesis is supported by the results from a Monte Carlo investigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Dahlberg, Matz & Eklöf, Matias, 2003. "Relaxing the IIA Assumption in Locational Choice Models: A Comparison Between Conditional Logit, Mixed Logit, and Multinomial Probit Models," Working Paper Series 2003:9, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:uunewp:2003_009

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Bergstrom, Theodore C & Goodman, Robert P, 1973. "Private Demands for Public Goods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(3), pages 280-296, June.
    2. Nechyba, Thomas J. & Strauss, Robert P., 1998. "Community choice and local public services: A discrete choice approach," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 51-73, January.
    3. Dahlberg, M. & Fredriksson, P., 2001. "Migration and Local Public Services," Papers 2001-12, Uppsala - Working Paper Series.
    4. Bergstrom, Theodore C & Rubinfeld, Daniel L & Shapiro, Perry, 1982. "Micro-Based Estimates of Demand Functions for Local School Expenditures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1183-1205, September.
    5. Borsch-Supan, Axel & Hajivassiliou, Vassilis A., 1993. "Smooth unbiased multivariate probability simulators for maximum likelihood estimation of limited dependent variable models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 347-368, August.
    6. Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1998. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 109-129, November.
    7. Yinger, John, 1982. "Capitalization and the Theory of Local Public Finance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(5), pages 917-943, October.
    8. Quigley, John M., 1985. "Consumer choice of dwelling, neighborhood and public services," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 41-63, February.
    9. Hajivassiliou, Vassilis & McFadden, Daniel & Ruud, Paul, 1996. "Simulation of multivariate normal rectangle probabilities and their derivatives theoretical and computational results," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1-2), pages 85-134.
    10. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    11. Edin, P.-A. & Fredriksson, P., 2000. "LINDA - Longitudinal INdividual DAta for Sweden," Papers 2000:19, Uppsala - Working Paper Series.
    12. Daniel McFadden, 1977. "Modelling the Choice of Residential Location," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 477, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    13. Rosen, Harvey S & Fullerton, David J, 1977. "A Note on Local Tax Rates, Public Benefit Levels, and Property Values," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(2), pages 433-440, April.
    14. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Brian Cushing, 2005. "The Role of Welfare and Space in the Migration of the Poor," Working Papers Working Paper 2005-08, Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University.
    2. Martine AUDIBERT & Yong HE & Jacky MATHONNAT, 2017. "What does demand heterogeneity tell us about health care provider choice in rural China?," Working Papers P193, FERDI.
    3. , 2008. "The Joint Choice Of An Individual'S Occupation And Destination," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(5), pages 893-919.
    4. Christiadi & Brian Cushing, 2007. "Conditional Logit, IIA, and Alternatives for Estimating Models of Interstate Migration," Working Papers Working Paper 2007-04, Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University.
    5. Thomas Aronsson & Sören Blomquist, 2008. "Redistribution and Provision of Public Goods in an Economic Federation," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 10(1), pages 125-143, February.
    6. Benjamin Wirth, 2013. "Ranking German regions using interregional migration - What does internal migration tells us about regional well-being?," ERSA conference papers ersa13p1254, European Regional Science Association.
    7. Sören Blomquist & Vidar Christiansen, 2008. "Taxation and Heterogeneous Preferences," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 64(2), pages 218-244, June.
    8. Jonathan Jones & Colin Wren, 2011. "On the Relative Importance of Agglomeration Economies in the Location of FDI Across British Regions," SERC Discussion Papers 0089, Spatial Economics Research Centre, LSE.
    9. Lutz Schneider & Alexander Kubis, 2010. "Are there Gender-specific Preferences for Location Factors? A Grouped Conditional Logit-Model of Interregional Migration Flows in Germany," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 130(2), pages 143-168.
    10. Martine AUDIBERT & Yong HE & Jacky MATHONNAT, 2017. "What does demand heterogeneity tell us about health care provider choice in rural China?," Working Papers P193, FERDI.
    11. Adnan, Wifag, 2015. "Who gets to cross the border? The impact of mobility restrictions on labor flows in the West Bank," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 86-99.
    12. Klaus Nowotny & Dieter Pennerstorfer, 2011. "Ethnic Networks and the Location Choice of Migrants in Europe," WIFO Working Papers 415, WIFO.
    13. Elisabetta Marinelli, 2011. "Graduate migration in Italy - Lifestyle or necessity?," ERSA conference papers ersa11p1608, European Regional Science Association.

    More about this item


    Locational choice; Tiebout migration; Mixed logit; Multinomial probit;

    JEL classification:

    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General
    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • H72 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Budget and Expenditures
    • H73 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Interjurisdictional Differentials and Their Effects

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:hhs:uunewp:2003_009. 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: (Katarina Grönvall). General contact details of provider: .

    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.