Substitution Effects and Spatial Preference Heterogeneity in Single- and Multiple-Site Choice Experiments

References

1. ↵
   1. Bateman Ian J.,
   2. Day Brett H.,
   3. Georgiou Stavros,
   4. Lake Iain

   2006. “The Aggregation of Environmental Benefit Values: Welfare Measures, Distance Decay and Total WTP.” Ecological Economics 60 (2): 450–60.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
2. ↵
   1. Bernhardt E. S.,
   2. Palmer M. A.,
   3. Allan J. D.,
   4. Alexander G.,
   5. Barnas K.,
   6. Brooks S.,
   7. Carr J.,
   8. Clayton S.,
   9. Dahm C.,
   10. Follstad-Shah J.,
   11. et al.

   2005. “Synthesizing U.S. River Restoration Efforts.” Science 308 (5722): 636–37.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
3. ↵
   1. Bhat Chandra R

   . 2001. “Quasi-random Maximum Simulated Likelihood Estimation of the Mixed Multinomial Logit Model.” Transportation Research B 35 (7): 677–95.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
4. ↵
   1. Brouwer Roy,
   2. Martín-Ortega Julia

   . 2012. “Modeling Self-censoring of Polluter Pays Protest Votes in Stated Preference Research to Support Resource Damage Estimations in Environmental Liability.” Resource and Energy Economics 34 (1): 151–66.

   OpenUrl
5. ↵
   1. Brouwer Roy,
   2. Slangen Louis H. G.

   1998. “Contingent Valuation of the Public Benefits of Agricultural Wildlife Management: The Case of Dutch Peat Meadow Land.” European Review of Agricultural Economics 25 (1): 53–72.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
6. ↵
   1. Brown Thomas C.,
   2. Duffield John W.

   1995. “Testing Part-Whole Valuation Effects in Contingent Valuation of Instream Flow Protection.” Water Resources Research 31 (9): 2341–51.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
7. ↵
   1. Cameron Trudy Ann

   . 2006. “Directional Heterogeneity in Distance Profiles in Hedonic Property Value Methods.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 51 (1): 26–45.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
8. ↵
   1. Campbell Danny,
   2. Hutchinson W. George,
   3. Scarpa Riccardo

   2009. “Using Choice Experiments to Explore the Spatial Distribution of Willingness to Pay for Rural Landscape Improvements.” Environment and Planning A 41 (1): 97–111.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
9. ↵
   1. Carson Richard T.,
   2. Groves Theodore

   . 2007. “Incentive and Informational Properties of Preference Questions.” Environmental and Resource Economics 37 (1): 181–210.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
10. ↵
    1. Collins Jill P.,
    2. Vossler Christian A.

    2009. “Incentive Compatibility Tests of Choice Experiment Value Elicitation Questions.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 58 (2): 226–35.

    OpenUrl
11. ↵
    1. Concu Giovanni B

    . 2007. “Investigating Distance Effects on Environmental Values: A Choice Modelling Approach.” Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 51 (2): 175–94.

    OpenUrl
12. ↵
    1. Cummings Ronald G.,
    2. Ganderton Philip T.,
    3. McGuckin Thomas

    1994. “Substitution Effects in CVM Values.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76 (2): 205–14.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
13. ↵
    1. FOEN (Swiss Federal Office for the Environment)

    . 2011. Restoration of Rivers and Lakes in the Water Protection Act [in German]. Available at www.bafu.admin.ch/dokumentation/medieninformation/00962/index.html?lang=de&msg-id=38964 (accessed October 24, 2015).
14. ↵
    1. Greene William H

    . 2002. Econometric Analysis, 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15. ↵
    1. Hailu Atakelty,
    2. Adamowicz Wiktor L.,
    3. Boxall Peter C.

    2000. “Complements, Substitutes, Budget Constraints and Valuation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 16 (1): 51–68.

    OpenUrl
16. ↵
    1. Hanley Nick,
    2. Schläpfer Felix,
    3. Spurgeon James

    2003. “Aggregating the Benefits of Environmental Improvements: Distance-Decay Functions for Use and Non-use Values.” Journal of Environmental Management 68 (3): 297–304.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. ↵
    1. Hensher David A.,
    2. Rose John M.,
    3. Greene William H.

    2005. Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18. ↵
    1. Hoehn John P.,
    2. Loomis John B.

    1993. “Substitution Effects in the Valuation of Multiple Environmental Programs.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 25 (1): 56–75.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
19. ↵
    1. Hynes Stephen,
    2. Hanley Nick,
    3. Scarpa Riccardo

    2008. “Effects on Welfare Measures of Alternative Means of Accounting for Preference Heterogeneity in Recreational Demand Models.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90 (4): 1011–27.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
20. ↵
    1. Johnston Robert J.,
    2. Ramachandran Mahesh

    . 2014. “Modeling Spatial Patchiness and Hot Spots in Stated Preference Willingness to Pay.” Environmental and Resource Economics 59 (3): 363–87.

    OpenUrl
21. ↵
    1. Jørgensen Sisse Liv,
    2. Olsen Søren Bøye,
    3. Ladenburg Jacob,
    4. Martinsen Louise,
    5. Svenningsen Stig Roar,
    6. Hasler Berit

    2013. “Spatially Induced Disparities in Users’ and Non-users’ WTP for Water Quality Improvements: Testing the Effect of Multiple Substitutes and Distance Decay.” Ecological Economics 92: 58–66.

    OpenUrl
22. ↵
    1. Kurth Anne-Marie,
    2. Schirmer Mario

    . 2014. “Thirty Years of River Restoration in Switzerland: Implemented Measures and Lessons Learned.” Environmental Earth Sciences 72 (6): 2065–79.

    OpenUrl
23. ↵
    1. Lancaster Kelvin J

    . 1966. “A New Approach to Consumer Theory.” Journal of Political Economy 74 (2): 132–57.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
24. ↵
    1. Lizin S.,
    2. Brouwer R.,
    3. Liekens I.,
    4. Broeckx S

    . 2016. “Accounting for Substitution and Spatial Heterogeneity in a Labelled Choice Experiment.” Journal of Environmental Management 181: 289–97.

    OpenUrl
25. ↵
    1. Loomis John B

    . 2000. “Vertically Summing Public Good Demand Curves: An Empirical Comparison of Economic versus Political Jurisdictions.” Land Economics 76 (2): 312–21.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
26. ↵
    1. Louviere Jordan J.,
    2. Hensher David A.,
    3. Swait Joffre D.

    2000. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27. ↵
    1. Mas-Colell Andreu,
    2. Whinston Michael D.,
    3. Green Jerry R.

    1995. Microeconomic Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
28. ↵
    1. McFadden Daniel

    . 1974. “Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior.” In Frontiers in Econometrics, ed. Zarembka Paul, 105–42. New York: Academic Press.
29. ↵
    1. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

    . 1993. “Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation.” Federal Register 58 (10): 4601–14.

    OpenUrl
30. ↵
    1. Neill Helen R

    . 1995. “The Context for Substitutes in CVM Studies: Some Empirical Observations.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 29 (3): 393–97.

    OpenUrl
31. ↵
    1. Paillex Amael,
    2. Schuwirth Nele,
    3. Lorenz Armin W.,
    4. Januschke Kathrin,
    5. Peter Armin,
    6. Reichert Peter

    2017. “Integrating and Extending Ecological River Assessment: Concept and Test with Two Restoration Projects.” Ecological Indicators 72: 131–41.

    OpenUrl
32. ↵
    1. Palmer Margaret A.,
    2. Menninger Holly L.,
    3. Bernhardt Emily

    2010. “River Restoration, Habitat Heterogeneity and Biodiversity: A Failure of Theory or Practice?” Freshwater Biology 55 (1): 205–22.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
33. ↵
    1. Pate Jennifer,
    2. Loomis John

    . 1997. “The Effect of Distance on Willingness to Pay Values: A Case Study of Wetlands and Salmon in California.” Ecological Economics 20 (3): 199–207.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
34. ↵
    1. Poe Gregory L.,
    2. Giraud Kelly L.,
    3. Loomis John B.

    2005. “Computational Methods for Measuring the Difference of Empirical Distributions.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87 (2): 353–65.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
35. ↵
    1. Revelt David,
    2. Train Kenneth

    . 1998. “Mixed Logit with Repeated Choices: Households’ Choices of Appliance Efficiency Level.” Review of Economics and Statistics 80 (4): 647–57.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
36. ↵
    1. Rolfe John,
    2. Bennett Jeff,
    3. Louviere Jordan

    2002. “Stated Values and Reminders of Substitute Goods: Testing for Framing Effects with Choice Modelling.” Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 46 (1): 1–20.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
37. ↵
    1. Rolfe John,
    2. Windle Jill

    . 2012. “Distance Decay Functions for Iconic Assets: Assessing National Values to Protect the Health of the Great Barrier Reef in Australia.” Environmental and Resource Economics 53 (3): 347–65.

    OpenUrl
38. ↵
    1. Rose John M.,
    2. Bliemer Michiel C. J.,
    3. Hensher David A.,
    4. Collins Andrew T.

    2008. “Designing Efficient Stated Choice Experiments in the Presence of Reference Alternatives.” Transportation Research Part B 42 (4): 395–406.

    OpenUrl
39. ↵
    1. Schaafsma Marije,
    2. Brouwer Roy

    . 2013. “Testing Geographical Framing and Substitution Effects in Spatial Choice Experiments.” Journal of Choice Modelling 8: 32–48.

    OpenUrl
40. 1. Schaafsma Marije,
    2. Brouwer Roy,
    3. Gilbert Alison,
    4. van den Bergh Jeroen,
    5. Wagtendonk Alfred

    2013. Estimation of Distance-Decay Functions to Account for Substitution and Spatial Heterogeneity in Stated Preference Research.” Land Economics 89 (3): 514–37.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
41. ↵
    1. Schaafsma Marije,
    2. Brouwer Roy,
    3. Rose John

    2012. “Directional Heterogeneity in WTP Models for Environmental Valuation.” Ecological Economics 79: 21–31.

    OpenUrl
42. ↵
    1. Swait Joffre,
    2. Louviere Jordan

    . 1993. “The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models.” Journal of Marketing Research 30 (3): 305–14.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
43. ↵
    1. Train Kenneth E

    . 2003. Discrete Choice Models with Simulation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
44. ↵
    1. Varian Hal R

    . 2014. Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach, 9th ed. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
45. ↵
    1. Woolsey Sharon,
    2. Capelli Florence,
    3. Gonser Tom,
    4. Hoehn Eduard,
    5. Hostmann Markus,
    6. Junker Berit,
    7. Paetzold Achim,
    8. Roulier Christian,
    9. Schweizer Steffen,
    10. Tiegs Scott D.,
    11. et al.

    2007. “A Strategy to Assess River Restoration Success.” Freshwater Biology 52 (4): 752–69.

    OpenUrl
46. ↵
    1. Woolsey Sharon,
    2. Weber Christine,
    3. Gonser Tom,
    4. Hoehn Eduard,
    5. Hostmann Markus,
    6. Junker Berit,
    7. Roulier Christian,
    8. Schweizer Steffen,
    9. Tiegs Scott D.,
    10. Tockner Klement,
    11. Peter Armin

    2005. Handbook for Evaluating Rehabilitation Projects in Rivers and Streams. A publication by the Rhone-Thur Project. Zurich: Swiss Federal Institute for Aquatic Science and Technology (Eawag), Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL), Laboratory of Hydraulic Constructions (LCH, EPFL Lausanne), and Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology (VAW, ETH Zurich).