Opt-Out Forced Choice Effect in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Discrete Choice Models: A Gender Perspective

Talpur, Musharaf and Brouwer, Roy and Koetse, Mark (2019): Opt-Out Forced Choice Effect in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Discrete Choice Models: A Gender Perspective.

Abstract

In this study, we assess the convergent validity of preferences and willingness-to-pay (WTP) values for beach quality improvements from a gender perspective by isolating opt-out forced-choice effect from the SP1 DCE data (that is a forced-choice situation when a respondent was asked to select among the competing labelled alternatives if they chose an opt-out). Following this approach, we combine the RP discrete choice model and SP1 DCE datasets by splitting them into female and male sub-samples and then investigate whether estimated preferences and WTP values are susceptible to this effect from a gender perspective. Using the multinomial logit (MNL) models, we find that female visitors’ preferences are compatible across RP and SP1 data if the forced-choice effect is isolated from SP1 data, whereas this is not true for the male visitors. However, WTP values appear similar for both the female and male RP and SP1 sub-samples. Also, the sources of opt-out forced choices appear more promising for females than those of male counterparts in the estimated binary logit models. Our results, therefore, suggest that preferences’ similarity is a gender-specific if the opt-out forced-choice effect is isolated, but WTP similarity is not.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Revealed preference; Discrete choice model, Discrete choice experiments; Opt-out forced-choice effect; Gender perspective
• Subjects: Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q51 - Valuation of Environmental Effects; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q57 - Ecological Economics: Ecosystem Services ; Biodiversity Conservation ; Bioeconomics ; Industrial Ecology

References

References

Adamowicz, W., Louviere, J. and Williams, M. (1994), Combining stated and revealed preference methods for valuing environmental amenities, Environmental Economics and Management 26, 271-292

Adamowicz, W., Swait, J., Boxall, P., Louviere, J. and Williams, M. (1997), Perceptions versus objective measures in combined revealed and stated preference models of environmental valuation, Environmental Economics and Management 32, 65–84

Arnberger, A. and Eder, R. (2011), The influence of age on recreational trail preferences of urban green-space visitors: a discrete choice experiment with digitally calibrated images, Environmental Planning and Management 54 (7), 891 – 908

Bakhtiari, F., Jacobsen, J., Thorsen, B. J., Lundhede, T., Strange, N, and Boman, M. (2018), Disentangling distance and country effects on the value of conservation across national borders, Ecological Economics 147, 11 – 20

Banzhaf, M. R., Johnson, F. R., and Mathews, K. (2001), Opt-out alternatives and anglers' stated preferences, The choice modelling approach to environmental valuation, 157-177

Bateman, I. J., Brouwer, R., Ferrini, S., Schaafsma, M., Barton, D., Dubgaard, A., Hasler, B., Hime, S., Liekens, I, Navrud, S., De Nocker, L., Šceponaviciute, R., and Semeniene. (2011), Making benefit transfers work: Deriving and testing principles for value transfers for similar and dissimilar sites using a case study of the non-market benefits of water quality improvements across Europe, Environmental and Resource Economics 50, 365–387

Birol, E., Kontoleon, A. and Smale, M. (2006), Combining revealed and stated preference methods to assess the private value of agro-biodiversity in Hungarian home gardens, EPT Discussion Paper 156, International Food Policy and Research Centre (IFPRI), Washington DC, USA

Bjerke, T., Østdahl, T., Thrane, C., and Strumse, E.. (2006), Vegetation density of urban parks and perceived appropriateness for recreation, Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 5, 35–44

Brouwer, R., Logar, I and Sheremet, O. (2017), Choice consistency and preference stability in test-retest s of discrete choice experiments and open-ended willingness to pay elicitation formats, Environmental and Resource Economics 68 (3), 729 – 751

Brouwer, R. (1999), Public right of access, overcrowding and the value of peace and quiet: the validity of contingent valuation as an information tool, CSERGE Working Paper GEC 99-05, University of East Anglia, UK

Cameron, T. (1992), Combining contingent valuation and travel cost data for the valuation of non-market goods, Land Economics 68 (3), 302 – 317

Campbell, D. and Erdem, S. (2018), Including opt-out options in discrete choice experiments: Issues to consider, The Patient – Patient Centered Outcome Research 12 (1), 1 – 14, Springer International

Carson, R. T. and Mitchell, R. C. (1993), The value of clean water: The Public's willingness to pay for boatable, fishable, and swimmable quality water, Water Resources Research 29, 2445–2454

Cheng, L. and Lupi, F. (2016), Combining revealed and stated preference methods for valuing water quality changes to Great Lake beaches, a selected paper for presentation for th2 2016 Agriculture and Applied Economics Association, Boston, M. A., July 31 – August 2, 2016

Choice Metrics, C. (2014), Ngene Software 1.1 , 1 User manual and reference guide, Sydney, Australia

Dhar, R. (1997), Consumer preference for no-choice option, Consumer Research 24 (2), 215 – 231

Dhar, R. and Simonson, I. (2003), The effect of forced-choice on choice, Journal of Marketing Research, 40(2), 146-160

Determann et. al. (2011), Impact of survey administration mode on the results of a health-related discrete choice experiment: Online and paper comparison, Value in Health 20 (7), 953 – 960

Hanley, N., Wright, R. and Koop, G. (2002), Modelling recreation demand using choice experiments: Climbing in Scotland, Environmental and Resource Economics 22 (3), 449-466

Hanley, N., Mourato, S., and Wright, R. E. (2001), Choice modelling approaches: A superior alternative for environmental valuation?, Journal of Economic Surveys, 15(3), 435-462.

Hensher, D. and Rose, J. (2007), Development of commuter and non-commuter mode choice models for the assessment of new public transport infrastructure projects: A case study, Transportation Research Part-A: Policy and Practice 41 (5), 428 – 443

Khalil, S. (1999), Economic valuation of the mangrove ecosystem along the Karachi coastal areas, in Joy E. Hecht (Ed.)., The Economic Value of the Environment: Cases from South Asia, IUCN

Keane et al (2016), Gender-differentiated preferences for community-based conservancy (CBC) initiative, PLoS ONE Journal 11 (3), doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152432

Kemperman, A.D.A.M. and Timmermans, H.J.P., 2006. Heterogeneity in urban park use of ageing visitors: A latent class analysis, Leisure Sciences, 28, 57–71

Krinsky, I. and Robb, A.L. (1986), On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities, Review of Economics and Statistics 68, 715–719

Kontoleon, A., and Yabe, M. (2003), Assessing the impacts of alternative ‘opt-out’ formats in choice experiment studies: consumer preferences for genetically modified content and production information in food, Journal of Agricultural Policy and Resources, 5(1), 1-43

KSDP: Karachi Strategic Development Plan (2007), Karachi Strategic Development Plan-2020, Master Plan Group of Offices, City District Government, Karachi, Pakistan

Ladenburg, J. and Olsen, S. B. (2008), Gender-specific starting point bias in choice experiments: Evidence from an empirical study, Environmental Economics and Management 56, 275 – 285

Lancaster, K. (1966), A new approach to consumer theory, The Journal of Political Economy, 74, 132 – 157

Lancsar, J., Hall, J., Madeleine, K., Kenny, P., Louviere, J., Fiebig, D., Hossain, I., Thien, F., Reddel, K., and Jenkins, C. (2007), Using discrete choice experiments to investigate subject preferences for preventive asthma medication, Respirology 12, (1) 127-136

Logar, I and Brouwer, R. (2018), Substitution and spatial preference heterogeneity in single – and multiple – site choice experiments, Land Economics 94 (2), 320-322

Louviere, J., Hensher, D. and Swait, J. (2000), Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications, Cambridge University Press

Mattmann, M., Logar, I. and Brouwer, R. (2019), Choice certainty, consistency, and monotonicity in discrete choice experiments, Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, 8 (2), 109 – 127

McFadden, D. (1974), Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour, In Zarembka, P., editor, Frontiers in econometrics, pages 105–142, Academic Press

Nlogit 5.0 / Limdep 10, (1986 – 2002), Econometric Software, Inc., New York, The USA

Pedersen, L. B. and Gyrd-Hansen, D. (2013), Implications of researchers dubious use of the ‘neither’ option, and recommendations on the future use of ‘status quo’ and ‘opt-out’ options in choice experiments, a presented at the International Choice Modelling Conference–2013, Sydney, Australia, July 3–5, 2013

Pedersen, L. B., Kjær, T., Kragstrup, J., and Gyrd-Hansen, D. (2011), Does the inclusion of a cost attribute in forced and unforced choices matter?: Results from a web survey applying the discrete choice experiment, Journal of Choice Modelling, 4(3), 88-109

Pedersen, L.B., Kiil, A., and Kjær, T. (2011), Soccer attendees' preferences for facilities at the Fionia Park Stadium: An application of the discrete choice experiment, Journal of Sports Economics, 12, (2) 179 – 199

Poe, G. L., Giraud, K. L., and Loomis, J. B. (2005), Computational methods for measuring the difference of empirical distributions, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87 (2): 353 – 65

Rose, J. and Bliemer, M. (2009), Constructing efficient stated choice experimental designs, Transport Reviews 29 (5), 587 – 617

SACEP (2007), Marine Litter in the South Asian Seas Region, A report, September-2007, South Asia Cooperative Environment Programme (SACEP), Colombo, Sri Lanka

Schaafsma, M. and Brouwer, R. (2013), Testing geographical framing and substitution effects in spatial choice experiments. Journal of Choice Modelling 8, 32 – 48

Smith, V. K., Zhang X., and Palmquist, R.B. (1997), Marine debris, beach quality and non-market values. Environmental and Resource Economics 10, 223–247

Swait, J. D. and Louviere, J. (1993), The role of scale parameter estimation in the estimation and comparison of Multinomial Logit models, Journal of Marketing Research 30, 304–314

Tahvanainen, L., Tyrväinen, L, Ihalainen, M., Vuorela, N. and Kolehmainen, O. (2001), Forest management and public perceptions – visual versus verbal information, Landscape and Urban Planning 53 (1/4), 53–70

Talpur, M. A., Koetse, M. J., and Brouwer, R. (2018), Accounting for implicit and explicit payment vehicles in a discrete choice experiment, Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, 7 (4), 363 – 385

Talpur, M.A., and Jariko, G.A. (2001), Role of environmental legislation and administration in protecting the environment: the experience of Pakistan, Biannual Research Journal of Grassroots 23, 75–84

Taylor, T., and Longo, A. (2010), Valuing algal bloom in the Black Sea Coast of Bulgaria: A choice experiments approach, Journal of Environmental Management 91, 1963–1971

Veldwijk, J., Lambooij, M., de Bekker-Grob, E., Smit, H. A. and de Wit, G. (2014), The effect of including an opt-out option in discrete choice experiments, PLoS ONE Journal 9(11), doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111805

Thompson, W. C., Aspinall, P., Bell, S. and Finlay, C. (2005), “It gets you away from everyday life”: Local woodlands and community use – what makes a difference?, Landscape Research 30 (1), 109–146