TABLE 4

Regression Results

	Oysters in Alabama N = 1,395		Oysters in Louisiana N = 1,254^{^b}		Salt Marsh in Alabama N = 489		Salt Marsh in Louisiana N = 1,016^{^b}		Mangroves in Louisiana N = 488^{^b}
	Coef.	Std. Err.	Coef.	Std. Err.	Coef.	Std. Err.	Coef.	Std. Err.	Coef.	Std. Err.
Price^{^a}	−4.62^***	0.09	−4.42^***	0.08	−4.56^***	0.18	−4.80^***	0.11	−4.74^***	0.19
Water quality (10%)	0.68^***	0.11	0.50^***	0.13	0.75^***	0.21	0.47^***	0.13	1.06^***	0.23
Water quality (20%)	Q 94^***	0.13	0.74^***	0.14	0.63^***	0.23	0.80^***	0.14	U2^***	0.26
Flood protection (10%)	0.27^***	0.10	0.70^***	0.12	0.35^*	0.20	0.56^***	0.14	Q77^***	0.22
Flood protection (15%)	0.51^***	0.13	094^***	0.15	0.65^**	0.28	0.92^***	0.15	0.70^**	0.27
Fisheries support (20%)	0.27^**	0.11	0.32^***	0.12	0.62^***	0.21	0.33^***	0.13	0.04	0.23
Fisheries support (30%)	0.33^***	0.10	0.73^***	0.12	0.98^***	0.21	0 40^***	0.13	0.39^*	0.23
Bird population (5%)	0.20^*	0.11	0.63^***	0.13	0.93^***	0.25	0.37^***	0.14	0.40^*	0.21
Bird population (10%)	0.53^***	0.11	0.55^***	0.12	1.28^***	0.22	0.61^***	0.12	0.28	0.19
Action alternative dummy	−4.80^***	1.49	−4.91^**	2.01	−4.93^***	1.42	−6.31^***	1.58	2.25	3.62
Variables Interacted with the Action Alternative Dummy
Survey will influence policy	3.57^***	1.29	6.75^***	1.82	1.75^***	0.68	4.59^***	0.95	0.98	1.78
Household will have to pay	0.27	0.43	3.42^***	1.29	0.20	0.41	ļ 99^***	0.76	0.74	1.52
Considered budget	1.71^**	0.69	−0.81	1.13	1.24^**	0.52	−0.87	0.74	−3.58^**	1.43
Shopping and living changes	1.08^**	0.44	1.15	0.72	0.95^**	0.43	0.88^*	0.46	2.04^**	0.94
Confidence (federal)	0.83^*	0.44	0.55	0.82	−0.95^**	0.42	0.69	0.59	−1.71	1.46
Confidence (state)	1.08^**	0.49	1.12	0.97	0.60	0.38	0.21	0.52	0.75	1.17
Age	−0.03^**	0.02	0.03	0.03	−0.02	0.01	0.03	0.02	0.07	0.05
Male	0.32	0.40	−2.12^**	1.01	0.41	0.41	0.06	0.61	−0.37	1.17
Income	0.16^**	0.07	0.24^**	0.11	0.17^**	0.08	0.16^**	0.08	−0.11	0.16
Unemployed	0.34	0.40	−2.39^**	1.16	0.28	0.44	1.55^**	0.74	−1.41	1.42
Hispanic	3.36^*	1.81	0.91	2.13	0.93	1.16	−2.78^*	1.48	2.18	3.10
2nd choice question			−0.61	1.04			−0.86	0.70	−1.02	0.67
3rd choice question			−2.05^**	0.93			−2.12^***	0.63	−1.48	0.97
4th choice question			−1.99^*	1.02			−2.22^***	0.62	−2.12^***	0.82
Latent Random Effects Parameters (co)
ω (action alternatives)	3.68^**	1.56	7.50^***	1.96	1.56	1.11	4.10^***	0.78	4 04^***	1.13
Log-likelihood value	−1,212.05		−918.59		−393.77		−841.94		−344.26
Wald chi-squared (22 for Alabama, 25 for Louisiana)	695.92^***		853.63^***		256.32^***		637.62^***		286.91^***

↵^a The estimates shown are of the log of the full price coefficient.
↵^b In these treatments, N represents the number of unique choice situations as some respondents answered four choice questions.
↵*, **, *** Significance at the 10%, 5%, and 1% levels, respectively.