IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea06/21203.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Testing Welfare Measurement Gains of Combining Stated and Revealed Preferences Methods Using Count Data Models

Author

Listed:
  • Gonzalez, Juan Marcos
  • Loomis, John B.
  • Gonzalez-Caban, Armando

Abstract

This research updates the joint estimation of revealed and stated preference data of Cameron (1992) to allow for joint estimation of the Travel Cost Method (TCM) portion using count data models. Further these count data models reflect correction for truncation and endogenous stratification associated with commonly used on-site recreation sampling. Our updated modeling framework also allows for testing of consistency of behavior between revealed and stated preference data rather than imposing it. Our empirical example is river recreation visitors to the Caribbean National Forest in Puerto Rico. For this data set we find consistency between revealed preference and stated preference data. We also find little gain in estimation efficiency in our data. This may be due to our contingent valuation question eliciting willingness to pay for existing site conditions, a benefit measure conceptually very similar to what is estimated with TCM. However, our updated joint estimation may make a significant improvement in estimation efficiency when the contingent valuation scenarios involve major changes in site quality not reflected in the TCM data.

Suggested Citation

  • Gonzalez, Juan Marcos & Loomis, John B. & Gonzalez-Caban, Armando, 2006. "Testing Welfare Measurement Gains of Combining Stated and Revealed Preferences Methods Using Count Data Models," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21203, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea06:21203
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.21203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/21203/files/sp06go03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.21203?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael D. Creel & John B. Loomis, 1990. "Theoretical and Empirical Advantages of Truncated Count Data Estimators for Analysis of Deer Hunting in California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(2), pages 434-441.
    2. Bishop, Richard C. & Heberlein, Thomas A., 1979. "Measuring Values Of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," 1979 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, Pullman, Washington 277818, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Richard T. Carson & Nicholas E. Flores & Kerry M. Martin & Jennifer L. Wright, 1996. "Contingent Valuation and Revealed Preference Methodologies: Comparing the Estimates for Quasi-Public Goods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(1), pages 80-99.
    4. Daniel Hellerstein & Robert Mendelsohn, 1993. "A Theoretical Foundation for Count Data Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(3), pages 604-611.
    5. Randall, Alan, 1998. "Beyond the crucial experiment: mapping the performance characteristics of contingent valuation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 197-206, June.
    6. Trudy Ann Cameron, 1992. "Combining Contingent Valuation and Travel Cost Data for the Valuation of Nonmarket Goods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 302-317.
    7. Richard C. Bishop & Thomas A. Heberlein, 1979. "Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 61(5), pages 926-930.
    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. Rolfe, John & Dyack, Brenda, 2010. "Testing for convergent validity between travel cost and contingent valuation estimates of recreation values in the Coorong, Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(4), pages 1-17.
    2. Chin-Huang Huang & Chiung-Hsia Wang, 2015. "Estimating the Total Economic Value of Cultivated Flower Land in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-19, April.
    3. Anthony Amoah & Peter G. Moffatt, 2017. "Estimating demand for reliable piped-water services in urban Ghana: An application of competing valuation approaches," University of East Anglia School of Economics Working Paper Series 2017-01, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    4. García De La Fuente, L. & Colina Vuelta, A., 2004. "Métodos directos e indirectos en la valoración económica de bienes ambientales, aplicación al valor de uso recreativo del Parque Natural de Somiedo," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 22, pages 1-26, Diciembre.
    5. Anthony Amoah & Peter G. Moffatt, 2021. "Willingness to pay for reliable piped water services: evidence from urban Ghana," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(4), pages 805-829, October.
    6. Hanemann, W. Michael & Kanninen, Barbara, 1996. "The Statistical Analysis Of Discrete-Response Cv Data," CUDARE Working Papers 25022, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    7. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    8. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    10. Vaughan, William J. & Ardila, Sergio, 1993. "Economic Analysis of the Environmental Aspects of Investment Projects," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 6300, Inter-American Development Bank.
    11. Anders Van Sandt & Dawn Thilmany McFadden, 2022. "Navigating the corn maze: Customizing travel cost models to value market segments in heterogeneous industries," Tourism Economics, , vol. 28(4), pages 899-919, June.
    12. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    13. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    14. Anders H. Sirén & Juan-Camilo Cardenas & Peter Hambäck & Kalle Parvinen, 2013. "Distance Friction and the Cost of Hunting in Tropical Forest," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(3), pages 558-574.
    15. Giraud, Kelly L. & Herrmann, Mark L., 2000. "An Investigation into Travel Cost Measurement," Western Region Archives 321675, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    16. 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.
    17. Marangon, Francesco & Visintin, Francesca, 2007. "Rural landscape valuation in a cross-border region," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 84.
    18. 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.
    19. Keane, Michael, 1997. "Current Issues in Discrete Choice Modeling," MPRA Paper 52515, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Carina Cavalcanti & Andreas Leibbrandt, 2017. "A glance into the willingness to reduce overfishing: Field evidence from a fishnet exchange program," Monash Economics Working Papers 09-17, Monash University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research Methods/ Statistical Methods;

    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:ags:aaea06:21203. 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: AgEcon Search (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.