IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssb/dispap/480.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Framework for Analyzing Rank Ordered Panel Data with Application to Automobile Demand

Author

Listed:

Abstract

In this paper we develop a framework for analyzing panel data with observations on rank ordered alternatives that allows for correlated random taste shifters across time and across alternatives. As a special case we obtain a nested logit model type for rank ordered alternatives. We have applied this framework to estimate several model versions for household demand for conventional and alternative fuel automobiles in Shanghai based on rank ordered data obtained from a stated preference survey. The preferred model is then used to calculate demand probabilities and elasticities and the willingness-to-pay for alternative fuel vehicles.

Suggested Citation

  • John K. Dagsvik & Gang Liu, 2006. "A Framework for Analyzing Rank Ordered Panel Data with Application to Automobile Demand," Discussion Papers 480, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:480
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ssb.no/a/publikasjoner/pdf/DP/dp480.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McFadden, Daniel L., 1984. "Econometric analysis of qualitative response models," Handbook of Econometrics, in: Z. Griliches† & M. D. Intriligator (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 24, pages 1395-1457, Elsevier.
    2. Daniel McFadden, 2001. "Economic Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 351-378, June.
    3. Dagsvik, John K. & Wennemo, Tom & Wetterwald, Dag G. & Aaberge, Rolf, 2002. "Potential demand for alternative fuel vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 361-384, May.
    4. Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Geir H. Bjertnæs, 2013. "Are tax exemptions for electric cars an efficient climate policy measure?," Discussion Papers 743, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    2. Geir H. Bjertnæs, 2013. "Biofuel mandate versus favourable taxation of electric cars. The case of Norway," Discussion Papers 745, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    3. Dennis Fok & Richard Paap & Bram Van Dijk, 2012. "A Rank‐Ordered Logit Model With Unobserved Heterogeneity In Ranking Capabilities," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(5), pages 831-846, August.
    4. Hackbarth, André & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Willingness-to-pay for alternative fuel vehicle characteristics: A stated choice study for Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 89-111.

    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. John K. Dagsvik, 2012. "Making Sen's capability approach operational. A random scale framework," Discussion Papers 710, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    2. John Dagsvik, 2013. "Making Sen’s capability approach operational: a random scale framework," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 75-105, January.
    3. Zhang, Yong & Yu, Yifeng & Zou, Bai, 2011. "Analyzing public awareness and acceptance of alternative fuel vehicles in China: The case of EV," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7015-7024.
    4. Liu, Gang, 2007. "A behavioral model of work-trip mode choice in Shanghai," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 456-476.
    5. Marley, A. A. J., 2002. "Random utility models and their applications: recent developments," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 289-302, July.
    6. Dagsvik John K., 2010. "Making Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach Operational: A Random Scale Framework for Empirical Modeling," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201005, University of Turin.
    7. Danielis, Romeo & Scorrano, Mariangela & Giansoldati, Marco & Rotaris, Lucia, 2019. "A meta-analysis of the importance of the driving range in consumers’ preference studies for battery electric vehicles," Working Papers 19_2, SIET Società Italiana di Economia dei Trasporti e della Logistica.
    8. Dagsvik, John K. & Wennemo, Tom & Wetterwald, Dag G. & Aaberge, Rolf, 2002. "Potential demand for alternative fuel vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 361-384, May.
    9. Kathrin Dudenhöffer, 2013. "Why electric vehicles failed," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 95-124, July.
    10. Cartenì, Armando & Cascetta, Ennio & de Luca, Stefano, 2016. "A random utility model for park & carsharing services and the pure preference for electric vehicles," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 49-59.
    11. Hidrue, Michael K. & Parsons, George R. & Kempton, Willett & Gardner, Meryl P., 2011. "Willingness to pay for electric vehicles and their attributes," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 686-705, September.
    12. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    13. Kyuho Maeng & Sungmin Ko & Jungwoo Shin & Youngsang Cho, 2020. "How Much Electricity Sharing Will Electric Vehicle Owners Allow from Their Battery? Incorporating Vehicle-to-Grid Technology and Electricity Generation Mix," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-25, August.
    14. J�r�me Massiani, 2013. "SP surveys for electric and alternative fuel vehicles: are we doing the right thing?," Working Papers 2013_01, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    15. Hoen, Anco & Koetse, Mark J., 2014. "A choice experiment on alternative fuel vehicle preferences of private car owners in the Netherlands," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 199-215.
    16. Arie Beresteanu, 2016. "Efficeincy Gains in Rank-ordered Multinomial Logit Models," Working Paper 5878, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    17. Leif Brandes & Egon Franck & Philipp Theiler, 2013. "The group size and loyalty of football fans: a two-stage estimation procedure to compare customer potentials across teams," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 176(2), pages 347-369, February.
    18. Jose J. Soto & Victor Cantillo & Julian Arellana, 2018. "Incentivizing alternative fuel vehicles: the influence of transport policies, attitudes and perceptions," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1721-1753, November.
    19. Hajivassiliou, Vassilis A. & Ruud, Paul A., 1986. "Classical estimation methods for LDV models using simulation," Handbook of Econometrics, in: R. F. Engle & D. McFadden (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 40, pages 2383-2441, Elsevier.
    20. Gabriela D. Oliveira & Luis C. Dias, 2019. "Influence of Demographics on Consumer Preferences for Alternative Fuel Vehicles: A Review of Choice Modelling Studies and a Study in Portugal," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-33, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Random utility models; Nested rank ordered logit models; Automobile demand; Alternative fuel vehicles;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • C33 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • L92 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Railroads and Other Surface Transportation

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ssb:dispap:480. 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: L Maasø (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbgvno.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.