IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zewdip/12017.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Forecasting adoption of ultra-low-emission vehicles using the GHK simulator and Bayes estimates of a multinomial probit model

Author

Listed:
  • Daziano, Ricardo A.
  • Achtnicht, Martin

Abstract

In this paper we use Bayes estimates of a multinomial probit model with fully flexible substitution patterns to forecast consumer response to ultra-low-emission vehicles. In this empirical application of the probit Gibbs sampler, we use stated-preference data on vehicle choice from a Germany-wide survey of potential light-duty-vehicle buyers using computer-assisted personal interviewing. We show that Bayesian estimation of a multinomial probit model with a full covariance matrix is feasible for this medium-scale problem. Using the posterior distribution of the parameters of the vehicle choice model as well as the GHK simulator we derive the choice probabilities of the different alternatives. We first show that the Bayes point estimates of the market shares reproduce the observed values. Then, we define a base scenario of vehicle attributes that aims at representing an average of the current vehicle choice situation in Germany. Consumer response to qualitative changes in the base scenario is subsequently studied. In particular, we analyze the effect of increasing the network of service stations for charging electric vehicles as well as for refueling hydrogen. The result is the posterior distribution of the choice probabilities that represent adoption of the energy-effcient technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Daziano, Ricardo A. & Achtnicht, Martin, 2012. "Forecasting adoption of ultra-low-emission vehicles using the GHK simulator and Bayes estimates of a multinomial probit model," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-017, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:12017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/56033/1/688724299.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bolduc, D. & Ben-Akiva, M., 1991. "A Multinational Probit Formulation for Large Choice Sets," Papers 9110, Laval - Recherche en Energie.
    2. Denis Bolduc & Bernard Fortin & Stephen Gordon, 1997. "Multinomial Probit Estimation of Spatially Interdependent Choices: An Empirical Comparison of Two New Techniques," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 20(1-2), pages 77-101, April.
    3. Keane, Michael P, 1994. "A Computationally Practical Simulation Estimator for Panel Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(1), pages 95-116, January.
    4. Hensher, David A., 2010. "Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 735-752, July.
    5. Dansie, B. R., 1985. "Parameter estimability in the multinomial probit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 526-528, December.
    6. Chari, V V & Kehoe, Patrick J, 1990. "International Coordination of Fiscal Policy in Limiting Economies," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(3), pages 617-636, June.
    7. McCulloch, Robert E. & Polson, Nicholas G. & Rossi, Peter E., 2000. "A Bayesian analysis of the multinomial probit model with fully identified parameters," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 173-193, November.
    8. Horne, Matt & Jaccard, Mark & Tiedemann, Ken, 2005. "Improving behavioral realism in hybrid energy-economy models using discrete choice studies of personal transportation decisions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 59-77, January.
    9. Martin Achtnicht, 2012. "German car buyers’ willingness to pay to reduce CO 2 emissions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(3), pages 679-697, August.
    10. 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.
    11. Brownstone, David & Bunch, David S. & Train, Kenneth, 2000. "Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, pages 315-338.
    12. Vassilis A. Hajivassiliou & Daniel L. McFadden, 1998. "The Method of Simulated Scores for the Estimation of LDV Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, pages 863-896.
    13. 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.
    14. Bunch, David S., 1991. "Estimability in the Multinomial Probit Model," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt1gf1t128, University of California Transportation Center.
    15. Brownstone, David & Bunch, David S & Golob, Thomas F & Ren, Weiping, 1996. "A Transactions Choice Model for Forecasting Demand for Alternative-Fuel Vehicles," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt3sm7w9zk, University of California Transportation Center.
    16. Geweke, John F. & Keane, Michael P. & Runkle, David E., 1997. "Statistical inference in the multinomial multiperiod probit model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 125-165, September.
    17. Nobile, Agostino, 2000. "Comment: Bayesian multinomial probit models with a normalization constraint," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 335-345, December.
    18. McCulloch, Robert & Rossi, Peter E., 1994. "An exact likelihood analysis of the multinomial probit model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1-2), pages 207-240.
    19. David Hensher & Matthew Beck & John Rose, 2011. "Accounting for Preference and Scale Heterogeneity in Establishing Whether it Matters Who is Interviewed to Reveal Household Automobile Purchase Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, pages 1-22.
    20. Moore, William L & Holbrook, Morris B, 1990. " Conjoint Analysis on Objects with Environmentally Correlated Attributes: The Questionable Importance of Representative Design," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 490-497, March.
    21. Geweke, John & Keane, Michael P & Runkle, David, 1994. "Alternative Computational Approaches to Inference in the Multinomial Probit Model," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(4), pages 609-632, November.
    22. Bunch, David S., 1991. "Estimability in the multinomial probit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-12, February.
    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. Tovar Reaños, Miguel Angel & Sommerfeld, Katrin, 2016. "Fuel for inequality: Distributional effects of environmental reforms on private transport," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-090, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    2. Rudolph, Christian, 2016. "How may incentives for electric cars affect purchase decisions?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, pages 113-120.
    3. Hackbarth, André & Madlener, Reinhard, 2011. "Consumer Preferences for Alternative Fuel Vehicles: A Discrete Choice Analysis," FCN Working Papers 20/2011, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    4. Hackbarth, André & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Willingness-to-pay for alternative fuel vehicle characteristics: A stated choice study for Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 89-111.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Discrete choice models; Bayesian econometrics; Low emission vehicles; Charging infrastructure;

    JEL classification:

    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources

    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:zbw:zewdip:12017. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.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.