Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation

By F. Rodríguez, Fredrik Carlsson, Peter Martinsson. 2001

476 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a01c4c013f06a236b14771a6c0bb0467d293618e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare: mobile abattoirs versus transportation to slaughter (2007, background): “3 For an overview of choice experiments, see Alpizar et al. (2003) and Louviere et al. (2000).”
Consumer Benefits of Labels and Bans on GM Foods—Choice Experiments with Swedish Consumers (2007, unknown): “For overviews of choice experiments, see Louviere, Hensher and Swait (2000) and Alpizar, Carlsson, and Martinsson (2003).”
Cultural bequest values for ecosystem service flows among indigenous fishers: A discrete choice experiment validated with mixed methods (2015, unknown): “Also, as the scale parameter is inversely related to the variance in the error term, given by δ(2) =Π(2)/6μ(2), it is valid to make such comparisons amongmodels, given appropriate controls on the respective scale parameter ratios (Alpizar et al., 2003; Hanley et al., 1998).”
External Tests of Scope and Embedding in Stated Preference Choice Experiments: An Application to Endangered Species Valuation (2011, background): “Bateman et al. (2002) distinguish between scope tests, which measure differences in WTP resulting from a change in one argument of the utility function, and embedding tests, which measure differences in WTP resulting from a change in multiple arguments of the utility function.”
Conformity and the Demand for Environmental Goods (2010, background): “In the analysis of purchasing and consumption decisions made on a regular basis, it is more difficult, although not impossible, to recreate a real world scenario in an experiment . 2 For methodological overviews of choice experiments, see Alpizar et al. (2003) and Louviere et al. (2000).”
The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments (2010, background): “Existing empirical evidence seems to corroborate this assertion (Carson et al., 1994; Alpizar et al., 2001; Carlsson and Martinsson, 2001).”
Valuing wetland attributes: an application of choice experiments (2003, background): “In recent years there has also been an increased use of choice experiments in non-market valuation (see e.g. Adamowicz et al., 1994; Layton and Brown, 2000; Alpizar et al., 2001).”
Incorporating Discontinuous Preferences into the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments (2008, background): “In discrete choice experiments, respondents are asked to select their preferred alternative from a given set (the choice set), and are typically asked to perform a sequence of such choices (Alpízar et al., 2001) giving rise to a panel of discrete choices.”
Consumer Preferences for Fruit and Vegetables with Credence-Based Attributes: A Review (2011, background): “One strategy to deal with lexicographic behavior is to use debriefing questions, probing further if respondents focused on only one or two of the attributes in the choice experiment (Alpizar et al. 2001; Rosenberg et al. 2003).”
Working Paper: The Fragmentation of Cities and its Decline: Global Evidence of Sprawl, 1990-2000 (2009, unknown): “The state of practice in experimental design centres on orthogonal designs (Alpizar et al., 2003), which are suitable when applied to surveys with a large sample size, in general.”
How Much is Too Much? (2008, methodology): “1 For overviews on the choice experiment method see for example Louviere et al. (2000), Alpizar et al. (2003) ,a ndAdamowicz and Deshazo (2006).”
Using Choice Experiments to Explore the Spatial Distribution of Willingness to Pay for Rural Landscape Improvements (2009, methodology): “experiments see, for example, Alpizar et al (2001) o r Louviere et al (2003).”
Does it Matter When a Power Outage Occurs? - A Choice Experiment Study on the Willingness to Pay to Avoid Power Outages (2008, methodology): “2 For overviews on the choice experiment method see for example Alpizar et al. (2003) and Louviere et al. (2000). 3 There is a possibility of negative correlation between the number of planned and unplanned outages.”
Valuing cultural heritage in developing countries: comparing and pooling contingent valuation and choice modelling estimates (2007, background): “years been increasingly applied to value non-market goods (see Alpizar et al. 2003 ).”