IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tor/tecipa/tecipa-213.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Revealed Preference Approach to the Measurement of Congestion in Travel Cost Models

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher Timmins
  • Jennifer Murdock

Abstract

Travel cost models are regularly used to determine the value of recreational sites or particular site characteristics, yet a key site attribute, congestion, is often excluded from such analyses. One of several reasons is that congestion (unlike many other site attributes) is determined in equilibrium by the process of individuals sorting across sites, and thus presents significant endogeneity problems. This paper illustrates this source of endogeneity, describes how previous research has dealt with it by way of stated preference techniques, and describes an instrumental variables approach to address it in a revealed preference context. We demonstrate that failing to address the endogeneity of congestion will likely lead to the understatement of its costs, and possibly to the mistaken recovery of agglomeration benefits. We apply our technique to the valuation of a large recreational fishing site in Wisconsin (Lake Winnebago) which, if eliminated, would induce significant re-sorting of anglers amongst remaining sites. In our application, ignoring congestion leads to an understatement of the lake’s value by more than 50 percent.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher Timmins & Jennifer Murdock, 2006. "A Revealed Preference Approach to the Measurement of Congestion in Travel Cost Models," Working Papers tecipa-213, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:tor:tecipa:tecipa-213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.economics.utoronto.ca/public/workingPapers/tecipa-213-1.pdf
    File Function: Main Text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael, Jeffrey A. & Reiling, Stephen D., 1997. "The Role of Expectations and Heterogeneous Preferences for Congestion in the Valuation of Recreation Benefits," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(2), pages 166-173, October.
    2. Patrick Bayer & Christopher Timmins, 2007. "Estimating Equilibrium Models Of Sorting Across Locations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(518), pages 353-374, March.
    3. Koenker, Roger W & Bassett, Gilbert, Jr, 1978. "Regression Quantiles," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 33-50, January.
    4. Guido W. Imbens & Whitney K. Newey, 2009. "Identification and Estimation of Triangular Simultaneous Equations Models Without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(5), pages 1481-1512, September.
    5. Boxall, Peter & Rollins, Kimberly & Englin, Jeffrey, 2003. "Heterogeneous preferences for congestion during a wilderness experience," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 177-195, May.
    6. Peter Schuhmann & Kurt Schwabe, 2004. "An Analysis of Congestion Measures and Heterogeneous Angler Preferences in a Random Utility Model of Recreational Fishing," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(4), pages 429-450, April.
    7. Frank J. Cesario, 1980. "Congestion and the Valuation of Recreation Benefits," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 56(3), pages 329-338.
    8. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    9. Victor Chernozhukov & Christian Hansen, 2005. "An IV Model of Quantile Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(1), pages 245-261, January.
    10. F. J. Anderson & N. C. Bonsor, 1974. "Allocation, Congestion, and the Valuation of Recreational Resources," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 50(1), pages 51-57.
    11. Roger Koenker & Kevin F. Hallock, 2001. "Quantile Regression," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 143-156, Fall.
    12. Bayer, Patrick & Timmins, Christopher, 2005. "On the equilibrium properties of locational sorting models," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 462-477, May.
    13. Murdock, Jennifer, 2006. "Handling unobserved site characteristics in random utility models of recreation demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 1-25, January.
    14. Michael, Jeffrey A. & Reiling, Stephen D., 1997. "The Role Of Expectations And Heterogeneous Preferences For Congestion In The Valuation Of Recreation Benefits," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-8, October.
    15. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    16. Kenneth E. McConnell, 1977. "Congestion and Willingness to Pay: A Study of Beach Use," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 53(2), pages 185-195.
    17. Boxall, Peter C. & Hauer, Grant & Adamowicz, Wiktor L., 2005. "Modeling Congestion as a Form of Interdependence in Random Utility Models," Staff Paper Series 24078, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Timmins, Christopher & Murdock, Jennifer, 2007. "A revealed preference approach to the measurement of congestion in travel cost models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 230-249, March.
    2. Felipe Vásquez & Michael Hanemann, 2008. "Taste Indicators and Heterogeneous Revealed Preferences for Congestion in Recreation Demand," Working Papers 10-2008, Departamento de Economía, Universidad de Concepción.
    3. Brown, Zachary S. & Connor, Lawson & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Yorobe, Jose M., 2021. "Landscape-level feedbacks in the demand for transgenic pesticidal corn in the Philippines," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    4. Jayeeta Bhattacharya, 2020. "Quantile regression with generated dependent variable and covariates," Papers 2012.13614, arXiv.org.
    5. Hicks, Robert L. & Horrace, William C. & Schnier, Kurt E., 2012. "Strategic substitutes or complements? The game of where to fish," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 168(1), pages 70-80.
    6. van Duijn, Mark & Rouwendal, Jan, 2021. "Sorting based on urban heritage and income: Evidence from the Amsterdam metropolitan area," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    7. Phaneuf, Daniel J. & Carbone, Jared C. & Herriges, Joseph A., 2009. "Non-price equilibria for non-marketed goods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 45-64, January.
    8. Junjie Zhang & Martin Smith, 2011. "Heterogeneous Response to Marine Reserve Formation: A Sorting Model approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(3), pages 311-325, July.
    9. Mark van Duijn & Jan Rouwendal, 2013. "Cultural heritage and the location choice of Dutch households in a residential sorting model," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 473-500, May.
    10. Steven T. Berry & Philip A. Haile, 2021. "Foundations of Demand Estimation," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2301, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    11. Yannis M. Ioannides, 2010. "Neighborhood Effects and Housing," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0747, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    12. Matzkin, Rosa L., 2012. "Identification in nonparametric limited dependent variable models with simultaneity and unobserved heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 106-115.
    13. Mélody Leplat & Philippe Le Goffe, 2009. "Faut-il réguler l'encombrement des sites récréatifs ? Un modèle de choix discret avec participation," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 90(1), pages 51-77.
    14. Hybel, Jesper & Mulalic, Ismir, 2022. "Transportation and quality of life," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-125.
    15. Mariétou H. Ouayogodé & Kurt E. Schnier, 2021. "Patient selection in the presence of regulatory oversight based on healthcare report cards of providers: the case of organ transplantation," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 160-184, March.
    16. Steven T. Berry & Philip A. Haile, 2014. "Identification in Differentiated Products Markets Using Market Level Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82, pages 1749-1797, September.
    17. Sasaki, Yuya, 2015. "What Do Quantile Regressions Identify For General Structural Functions?," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(5), pages 1102-1116, October.
    18. von Haefen, Roger H. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 2008. "Identifying demand parameters in the presence of unobservables: A combined revealed and stated preference approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 19-32, July.
    19. Leplat, Mélody & Le Goffe, Philippe, 2009. "Faut-il réguler l'encombrement des sites récréatifs ? Un modèle de choix discret avec participation," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 90(1).
    20. Caetano, Gregorio & Maheshri, Vikram, 2017. "School segregation and the identification of tipping behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 115-135.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Congestion; Random Utility Model; Site Valuation; Travel Cost; Discrete Choice; Instrumental Variables; Quantile Regression;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    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:tor:tecipa:tecipa-213. 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: RePEc Maintainer (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.