IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v76y1994i4p772-780..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sampling and Aggregation Issues in Random Utility Model Estimation

Author

Listed:
  • Peter M. Feather

Abstract

Measurement of nonmarket values often involves subjective judgments. Since these judgments may influence results, they should be carefully considered. I focus on an aspect of subjective choice relating to the estimation of random utility models. Such models require specification of each recreationalist's choice set. Whether an individual perceives his choice set as composed of all possible alternatives, a few popular alternatives, or collections of spatially aggregated alternatives is an important judgment affecting the conclusions.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter M. Feather, 1994. "Sampling and Aggregation Issues in Random Utility Model Estimation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(4), pages 772-780.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:76:y:1994:i:4:p:772-780.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1243738
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Melstrom, Richard T., 2017. "The petroleum industry's response to an endangered species listing," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258281, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Hicks, Robert L. & Holland, Daniel S. & Kuriyama, Peter T. & Schnier, Kurt E., 2020. "Choice sets for spatial discrete choice models in data rich environments," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    3. Daniel J. Phaneuf & Catherine L. Kling & Joseph A. Herriges, 2000. "Estimation and Welfare Calculations in a Generalized Corner Solution Model with an Application to Recreation Demand," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(1), pages 83-92, February.
    4. Stafford, Tess M., 2018. "Accounting for outside options in discrete choice models: An application to commercial fishing effort," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 159-179.
    5. von Haefen, Roger H. & Domanski, Adam, 2018. "Estimation and welfare analysis from mixed logit models with large choice sets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 101-118.
    6. Melstrom, Richard T., 2017. "Where to drill? The petroleum industry's response to an endangered species listing," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 320-327.
    7. Murdock, Jennifer, 1999. "Welfare Implications of Site Aggregation: A Comparison of Conditional Logit and Random Parameters Logit Estimates," Western Region Archives 321715, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    8. Moore, Rebecca & MacPherson, Alexander J. & Provencher, Bill, 2005. "A Dynamic Principal-Agent Model of Human-Mediated Aquatic Species Invasions," Staff Papers 12684, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    9. Backstrom, Jesse D. & Woodward, Richard T., 2017. "Using Qualitative Site Characteristics Data in Marine Recreational Fishing Models: A New Site Aggregation Approach," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258276, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Lupi, Frank & Feather, Peter M., 1997. "Using Partial Site Aggregation to Reduce Bias in Random Utility Travel Cost Models," Staff Paper Series 201220, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    11. Carlo Fezzi & Ian J. Bateman, 2013. "Estimating the Value of Travel Time to Recreational Sites Using Revealed Preferences," Working Papers 2013.64, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    12. Yongjie Ji & Joseph A. Herriges & Catherine L. Kling, 2016. "Modeling Recreation Demand When the Access Point Is Unknown," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(3), pages 860-880.
    13. Bhattacharyya, Aditi & Kutlu, Levent & Sickles, Robin C., 2018. "Pricing Inputs and Outputs: Market prices versus shadow prices, market power, and welfare analysis," Working Papers 18-009, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    14. Agimass, Fitalew & Lundhede, Thomas & Panduro, Toke Emil & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2018. "The choice of forest site for recreation: A revealed preference analysis using spatial data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 445-454.
    15. Yip, Arthur H.C. & Michalek, Jeremy J. & Whitefoot, Kate S., 2018. "On the implications of using composite vehicles in choice model prediction," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 163-188.
    16. Moore, Rebecca & Macpherson, Alex & Provencher, Bill, 2005. "A Dynamic Principal-Agent Model of Human-Mediated Aquatic Species Invasions," Staff Paper Series 485, University of Wisconsin, Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    17. MacPherson, Alexander J. & Moore, Rebecca & Provencher, Bill, 2006. "A Dynamic Principal-Agent Model of Human-Mediated Aquatic Species Invasions," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 35(1), pages 1-11, April.
    18. 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.
    19. Timar, Levente & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 2009. "Modeling the human-induced spread of an aquatic invasive: The case of the zebra mussel," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 3060-3071, October.

    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:oup:ajagec:v:76:y:1994:i:4:p:772-780.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.