IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v41y2007i9p874-889.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The logsum as an evaluation measure: Review of the literature and new results

Author

Listed:
  • de Jong, Gerard
  • Daly, Andrew
  • Pieters, Marits
  • van der Hoorn, Toon

Abstract

The logsum is a measure of consumer surplus in the context of logit choice models. In spite of the very frequent use of logit models in transport, project assessment is only rarely done using logsums. Instead in project evaluation or appraisal, changes in transport costs and time (borrowing values of time from some source) are commonly used to get the traveller benefits. The paper contains a review of the theoretical and applied literature on the use of logsums as a measure of consumer surplus change in project appraisal and evaluation. It then goes on to describe a case study with the Dutch National Model System for transport in which the logsum method and the commonly used value of time method are compared for a specific project (high speed trains that would connect the four main cities in the Randstad: Amsterdam, The Hague, Rotterdam and Utrecht).

Suggested Citation

  • de Jong, Gerard & Daly, Andrew & Pieters, Marits & van der Hoorn, Toon, 2007. "The logsum as an evaluation measure: Review of the literature and new results," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 874-889, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:41:y:2007:i:9:p:874-889
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965-8564(07)00031-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, September.
    2. von Haefen, Roger H., 2003. "Incorporating observed choice into the construction of welfare measures from random utility models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 145-165, March.
    3. Joseph A. Herriges & Catherine L. Kling, 1999. "Nonlinear Income Effects in Random Utility Models," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(1), pages 62-72, February.
    4. H C W L Williams, 1977. "On the Formation of Travel Demand Models and Economic Evaluation Measures of User Benefit," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 9(3), pages 285-344, March.
    5. 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.
    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. Francisco Javier Amador & Rosa Marina González & Juan de Dios Ortúzar, 2004. "Preference heterogeneity and willingness to pay for travel time," Documentos de trabajo conjunto ULL-ULPGC 2004-12, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas de la ULPGC.
    2. Delle Site, Paolo & Salucci, Marco Valerio, 2013. "Transition choice probabilities and welfare analysis in random utility models with imperfect before–after correlation," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 215-242.
    3. Phaneuf, Daniel J. & Smith, V. Kerry, 2006. "Recreation Demand Models," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 671-761, Elsevier.
    4. Haoge Chang & Yusuke Narita & Kota Saito, 2022. "Approximating Choice Data by Discrete Choice Models," Papers 2205.01882, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    5. Stephane Hess & John W. Polak, 2004. "An analysis of parking behaviour using discrete choice models calibrated on SP datasets," ERSA conference papers ersa04p60, European Regional Science Association.
    6. von Haefen, Roger H. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L., 2003. "Not Playing The Game: Non-Particpation In Repeated Discrete Choice Models," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22037, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Hess, Stephane & Bierlaire, Michel & Polak, John W., 2005. "Estimation of value of travel-time savings using mixed logit models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(2-3), pages 221-236.
    8. Hocheol Jeon & Joseph A. Herriges, 2017. "Combining Revealed Preference Data with Stated Preference Data: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(4), pages 1053-1086, December.
    9. H. Allen Klaiber & Roger H. von Haefen, 2019. "Do Random Coefficients and Alternative Specific Constants Improve Policy Analysis? An Empirical Investigation of Model Fit and Prediction," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(1), pages 75-91, May.
    10. Bernard Fortin & Nicolas Jacquemet & Bruce Shearer, 2021. "Labour supply, service intensity, and contracts: Theory and evidence on physicians," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(6), pages 686-702, September.
    11. Schueftan, Alejandra & Aravena, Claudia & Reyes, René, 2021. "Financing energy efficiency retrofits in Chilean households: The role of financial instruments, savings and uncertainty in energy transition," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    12. Rodríguez Hernández, J.E. & Barrios García, J.A., 2003. "Un modelo logit mixto de tenencia de vivienda en Canarias," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 21, pages 173-191, Abril.
    13. Lemp, Jason D. & Kockelman, Kara M., 2012. "Strategic sampling for large choice sets in estimation and application," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 602-613.
    14. Stephane Hess & Denis Bolduc & John Polak, 2010. "Random covariance heterogeneity in discrete choice models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 391-411, May.
    15. Franceschinis, Cristiano & Thiene, Mara & Scarpa, Riccardo & Rose, John & Moretto, Michele & Cavalli, Raffaele, 2017. "Adoption of renewable heating systems: An empirical test of the diffusion of innovation theory," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 313-326.
    16. Francisco Javier Amador Morera & Rosa Marina González Marrero, 2005. "Value of Travel Time Savings for University Students and Preference Heterogeneity," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 174(3), pages 25-41, September.
    17. Boeri, Marco & Scarpa, Riccardo & Chorus, Caspar G., 2014. "Stated choices and benefit estimates in the context of traffic calming schemes: Utility maximization, regret minimization, or both?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 121-135.
    18. Kim, Sooil & Haab, Timothy C., 2005. "Generalized Estimation Methods for Non-i.i.d. Binary Data: An Application to Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19138, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Richard T. Carson & Derrick H. Sun & Yixiao Sun, 2024. "Random Utility Models with Skewed Random Components: the Smallest versus Largest Extreme Value Distribution," Papers 2405.08222, arXiv.org, revised May 2024.
    20. Hess, Stephane & Daly, Andrew & Rohr, Charlene & Hyman, Geoff, 2007. "On the development of time period and mode choice models for use in large scale modelling forecasting systems," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 802-826, November.

    More about this item

    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:eee:transa:v:41:y:2007:i:9:p:874-889. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    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.