1,721,180 research outputs found
Substitution Effects in Spatial Discrete Choice Experiments
No full textThis paper explores spatial substitution patterns using a choice experiment to estimate the non-market benefits of environmental quality improvements at different sites presented as labelled alternatives. We develop a novel modelling approach to estimate possible disproportional substitution patterns among these alternatives by including cross-effects in site-specific utility functions, combining mixed and universal logit models. The latter model allows for more flexibility in substitution patterns than random parameters and error-components in mixed logit models. The model is relevant to any discrete choice study that compares multiple sites that vary in their comparability and that may be perceived as (imperfect) substitutes. Applying the model in an empirical case study shows that accounting for cross-effects results in a better model fit. We discuss the validity of welfare estimates based on the inclusion of cross-effects. The results demonstrate the importance of accounting for substitution effects in spatial choice models with the aim to inform policy and decision-making.</p
Overview of existing guidelines and manuals for the economic valuation of environmental and resource costs and benefits
No full textAccounting for substitution and spatial heterogeneity in a labeled choice experiment
No full textMany environmental valuation studies using stated preferences techniques are single-site studies that ignore essential spatial aspects, including possible substitution effects. In this paper substitution effects are captured explicitly in the design of a labeled choice experiment and the inclusion of different distance variables in the choice model specification. We test the effect of spatial heterogeneity on welfare estimates and transfer errors for minor and major river restoration works, and the transferability of river specific utility functions, accounting for key variables such as site visitation, spatial clustering and income. River specific utility functions appear to be transferable, resulting in low transfer errors. However, ignoring spatial heterogeneity increases transfer errors.FWO grant number 12G5415
Accounting for substitution and spatial heterogeneity in a labeled choice experiment
No full textMany environmental valuation studies using stated preferences techniques are single-site studies that ignore essential spatial aspects, including possible substitution effects. In this paper substitution effects are captured explicitly in the design of a labeled choice experiment and the inclusion of different distance variables in the choice model specification. We test the effect of spatial heterogeneity on welfare estimates and transfer errors for minor and major river restoration works, and the transferability of river specific utility functions, accounting for key variables such as site visitation, spatial clustering and income. River specific utility functions appear to be transferable, resulting in low transfer errors. However, ignoring spatial heterogeneity increases transfer errors.FWO grant number 12G5415
Accounting for substitution and spatial heterogeneity in a labeled choice experiment
No full textMany environmental valuation studies using stated preferences techniques are single-site studies that ignore essential spatial aspects, including possible substitution effects. In this paper substitution effects are captured explicitly in the design of a labeled choice experiment and the inclusion of different distance variables in the choice model specification. We test the effect of spatial heterogeneity on welfare estimates and transfer errors for minor and major river restoration works, and the transferability of river specific utility functions, accounting for key variables such as site visitation, spatial clustering and income. River specific utility functions appear to be transferable, resulting in low transfer errors. However, ignoring spatial heterogeneity increases transfer errors.FWO grant number 12G5415
Accounting for substitution and spatial heterogeneity in a labeled choice experiment
No full textMany environmental valuation studies using stated preferences techniques are single-site studies that ignore essential spatial aspects, including possible substitution effects. In this paper substitution effects are captured explicitly in the design of a labeled choice experiment and the inclusion of different distance variables in the choice model specification. We test the effect of spatial heterogeneity on welfare estimates and transfer errors for minor and major river restoration works, and the transferability of river specific utility functions, accounting for key variables such as site visitation, spatial clustering and income. River specific utility functions appear to be transferable, resulting in low transfer errors. However, ignoring spatial heterogeneity increases transfer errors.FWO grant number 12G5415
Testing geographical framing and substitution effects in spatial choice experiments
Full text linkOne of the main challenges in modelling spatial choices is the complexity resulting from the availability of multiple alternatives at different geographical scales. This study aims to test geographical framing and substitution effects in stated choice experiments by first increasing and subsequently reducing the geographical scale and associated set of choice alternatives in the experiment. Geographical framing effects are tested by comparing estimated choice models for differently sized choice sets. Testing these framing effects related to choice set size helps to inform decisions on choice set composition. The results indicate that changing the choice set size has little to no effect on preference parameters and estimated WTP values. However, the larger choice set is associated with higher error variance, suggesting higher choice task complexity
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Accounting for substitution and spatial heterogeneity in a labelled choice experiment
No full textMany environmental valuation studies using stated preferences techniques are single-site studies that ignore essential spatial aspects, including possible substitution effects. In this paper substitution effects are captured explicitly in the design of a labelled choice experiment and the inclusion of different distance variables in the choice model specification. We test the effect of spatial heterogeneity on welfare estimates and transfer errors for minor and major river restoration works, and the transferability of river specific utility functions, accounting for key variables such as site visitation, spatial clustering and income. River specific utility functions appear to be transferable, resulting in low transfer errors. However, ignoring spatial heterogeneity increases transfer errors.</p
- …
