IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpc/wplist/wp21_08.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Parameters Heterogeneity in a Model of Labour Supply: Exploring the Performance of Mixed Logit

Author

Listed:
  • Ugo Colombino
  • Marilena Locatelli

Abstract

In this note we investigate the empirical differences between the Random Utility model with fixed coefficients (Conditional Logit), and the Random Utility model with random coefficients (Mixed Logit). We consider a model of household labour supply developed for a project aimed at the evaluation of alternative Basic Income mechanisms. Data are drawn from the 1998 Bank of Italy survey of household income and wealth (SHIW 1998) and choice alternatives are generated using EUROMOD. We compare the estimates of the Conditional Logit and Mixed Logit. We also compare the respective results from simulating the effects of a Flat Tax reform. Although on average the estimates of Conditional Logit and of Mixed Logit are very close, the Mixed Logit estimates reveal that there is a significant unobserved heterogeneity of preferences. We also compare the simulations of a hypothetical Flat Tax reform. Although the differences are small, yet the results would imply different policy conclusions depending on whether Conditional Logit or Mixed Logit is adopted.

Suggested Citation

  • Ugo Colombino & Marilena Locatelli, 2008. "Parameters Heterogeneity in a Model of Labour Supply: Exploring the Performance of Mixed Logit," CHILD Working Papers wp21_08, CHILD - Centre for Household, Income, Labour and Demographic economics - ITALY.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpc:wplist:wp21_08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.child.carloalberto.org/images/wp/child21_2008.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joel Huber and Kenneth Train., 2000. "On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths," Economics Working Papers E00-289, University of California at Berkeley.
    2. O'Donoghue, Cathal & Colombino, Ugo & Narazani, Edlira & Locatelli, Marilena & Shima, Isilda, 2008. "Behavioural and welfare effects of basic income policies: a simulation for European countries," EUROMOD Working Papers EM5/08, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    3. Peter Haan & Arne Uhlendorff, 2006. "Estimation of multinomial logit models with unobserved heterogeneity using maximum simulated likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 6(2), pages 229-245, June.
    4. Steinar StrØm & John K. Dagsvik, 2006. "Sectoral labour supply, choice restrictions and functional form," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 803-826.
    5. Ugo Colombino & Annamaria Nese, 2009. "Preference Heterogeneity in Relation to Museum Services," Tourism Economics, , vol. 15(2), pages 381-395, June.
    6. Kenneth Train ., 2000. "Halton Sequences for Mixed Logit," Economics Working Papers E00-278, University of California at Berkeley.
    7. 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.
    8. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, September.
    9. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    10. Deaton,Angus & Muellbauer,John, 1980. "Economics and Consumer Behavior," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521296762, September.
    11. repec:bla:scandj:v:97:y:1995:i:4:p:635-59 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Aaberge, Rolf & Colombino, Ugo & Strom, Steinar, 1999. "Labour Supply in Italy: An Empirical Analysis of Joint Household Decisions, with Taxes and Quantity Constraints," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(4), pages 403-422, July-Aug..
    13. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    14. Kenneth E. Train, 1998. "Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences over People," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 230-239.
    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. Fosgerau, Mogens & Bierlaire, Michel, 2007. "A practical test for the choice of mixing distribution in discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 784-794, August.
    2. Frick, Bernd & Barros, Carlos Pestana & Prinz, Joachim, 2010. "Analysing head coach dismissals in the German "Bundesliga" with a mixed logit approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 151-159, January.
    3. Rolf Aaberge & Ugo Colombino, 2014. "Labour Supply Models," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: Handbook of Microsimulation Modelling, volume 127, pages 167-221, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    4. 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.
    5. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2007. "Discrete choice survey experiments: A comparison using flexible methods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 122-139, January.
    6. Campbell, Danny & Hutchinson, W. George & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2006. "Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Derive Individual-Specific WTP Estimates for Landscape Improvements under Agri-Environmental Schemes: Evidence from the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Irel," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12220, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    7. Campbell, Danny & Hutchinson, W. George & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2006. "Lexicographic Preferences in Discrete Choice Experiments: Consequences on Individual-Specific Willingness to Pay Estimates," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12224, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    8. Kjaer, Trine & Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte, 2008. "Preference heterogeneity and choice of cardiac rehabilitation program: Results from a discrete choice experiment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 124-132, January.
    9. Marco A. Palma & Dmitry V. Vedenov & David Bessler, 2020. "The order of variables, simulation noise, and accuracy of mixed logit estimates," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(5), pages 2049-2083, May.
    10. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Lagerkvist, Carl Johan, 2007. "Farm Animal Welfare—Testing for Market Failure," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 61-73, April.
    11. 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).
    12. Campbell, Danny, 2007. "Combining mixed logit models and random effects models to identify the determinants of willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7975, Agricultural Economics Society.
    13. Faustin, Vidogbèna & Adégbidi, Anselme A. & Garnett, Stephen T. & Koudandé, Delphin O. & Agbo, Valentin & Zander, Kerstin K., 2010. "Peace, health or fortune?: Preferences for chicken traits in rural Benin," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1848-1857, July.
    14. Fosgerau, Mogens & Hess, Stephane, 2008. "Competing methods for representing random taste heterogeneity in discrete choice models," MPRA Paper 10038, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Angel Bujosa & Antoni Riera & Robert Hicks, 2010. "Combining Discrete and Continuous Representations of Preference Heterogeneity: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(4), pages 477-493, December.
    19. Danny Campbell & George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa, 2006. "Using mixed logit models to derive individual-specific WTP estimates for landscape improvements under agri-environmental schemes: evidence from the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Ireland," Working Papers 0607, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    20. Jie Yu & Peter Goos & Martina Vandebroek, 2009. "Efficient Conjoint Choice Designs in the Presence of Respondent Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 122-135, 01-02.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    labour supply; conditional logit; mixed logit; unobserved heterogeneity;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D0 - Microeconomics - - General
    • J0 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - General

    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:wpc:wplist:wp21_08. 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: Giovanni Bert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/childit.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.