评估混合选择模型在环境经济学中的应用现状,并对未来的应用进行思考

IF 2.8 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Journal of Choice Modelling Pub Date : 2024-10-16 DOI:10.1016/j.jocm.2024.100520
Petr Mariel , Alaitz Artabe , Ulf Liebe , Jürgen Meyerhoff
{"title":"评估混合选择模型在环境经济学中的应用现状,并对未来的应用进行思考","authors":"Petr Mariel ,&nbsp;Alaitz Artabe ,&nbsp;Ulf Liebe ,&nbsp;Jürgen Meyerhoff","doi":"10.1016/j.jocm.2024.100520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study examines the use of hybrid choice models (HCM), also referred to as integrated choice and latent variable (ICLV) models, within environmental valuation studies. The investigation is motivated by the fact that stated preference surveys in this field increasingly incorporate additional data into their modelling, particularly respondents' attitudes towards the environment in a broader context or specifically towards the environmental changes under evaluation. Key findings include the fact that sample sizes are usually too small for such complex models, that many studies use ad hoc scales as indicators of latent variables without first testing the validity and reliability of the scales, and that model results are often not compared with a benchmark model. One particularly notable finding of the simulation study is that excluding a latent variable, such as estimating Random Parameter Logit (RPL) instead of HCM, does not necessarily lead to biased willingness to pay (WTP) estimates. Therefore, if the inclusion of a latent construct is not critical to the study, we suggest opting for more traditional and robust models such as RPL or Latent Class Models (LCM). The perceived benefits of gaining a better understanding of how latent factors influence decisions come with risks associated with defining and estimating an HCM. To improve the quality of research, we provide recommendations for future applications of HCM in environmental economics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46863,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Choice Modelling","volume":"53 ","pages":"Article 100520"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An assessment of the current use of hybrid choice models in environmental economics, and considerations for future applications\",\"authors\":\"Petr Mariel ,&nbsp;Alaitz Artabe ,&nbsp;Ulf Liebe ,&nbsp;Jürgen Meyerhoff\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jocm.2024.100520\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This study examines the use of hybrid choice models (HCM), also referred to as integrated choice and latent variable (ICLV) models, within environmental valuation studies. The investigation is motivated by the fact that stated preference surveys in this field increasingly incorporate additional data into their modelling, particularly respondents' attitudes towards the environment in a broader context or specifically towards the environmental changes under evaluation. Key findings include the fact that sample sizes are usually too small for such complex models, that many studies use ad hoc scales as indicators of latent variables without first testing the validity and reliability of the scales, and that model results are often not compared with a benchmark model. One particularly notable finding of the simulation study is that excluding a latent variable, such as estimating Random Parameter Logit (RPL) instead of HCM, does not necessarily lead to biased willingness to pay (WTP) estimates. Therefore, if the inclusion of a latent construct is not critical to the study, we suggest opting for more traditional and robust models such as RPL or Latent Class Models (LCM). The perceived benefits of gaining a better understanding of how latent factors influence decisions come with risks associated with defining and estimating an HCM. To improve the quality of research, we provide recommendations for future applications of HCM in environmental economics.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46863,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Choice Modelling\",\"volume\":\"53 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100520\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Choice Modelling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534524000526\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Choice Modelling","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534524000526","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究探讨了在环境估值研究中使用混合选择模型 (HCM)(也称为综合选择和潜变量模型 (ICLV))的问题。这项研究的动机是,该领域的陈述偏好调查越来越多地将额外数据纳入其建模中,特别是受访者对更广泛环境的态度或对所评估环境变化的具体态度。主要发现包括:对于这种复杂的模型来说,样本量通常太小;许多研究使用临时量表作为潜在变量的指标,而没有首先测试量表的有效性和可靠性;模型结果通常没有与基准模型进行比较。模拟研究的一个特别值得注意的发现是,排除一个潜变量,如用随机参数对数(RPL)代替 HCM 进行估计,并不一定会导致对支付意愿(WTP)的估计出现偏差。因此,如果包含潜变量对研究并不重要,我们建议选择更传统、更稳健的模型,如 RPL 或潜类模型 (LCM)。要想更好地了解潜在因素如何影响决策,就必须对 HCM 进行定义和估算。为了提高研究质量,我们就 HCM 在环境经济学中的未来应用提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An assessment of the current use of hybrid choice models in environmental economics, and considerations for future applications
This study examines the use of hybrid choice models (HCM), also referred to as integrated choice and latent variable (ICLV) models, within environmental valuation studies. The investigation is motivated by the fact that stated preference surveys in this field increasingly incorporate additional data into their modelling, particularly respondents' attitudes towards the environment in a broader context or specifically towards the environmental changes under evaluation. Key findings include the fact that sample sizes are usually too small for such complex models, that many studies use ad hoc scales as indicators of latent variables without first testing the validity and reliability of the scales, and that model results are often not compared with a benchmark model. One particularly notable finding of the simulation study is that excluding a latent variable, such as estimating Random Parameter Logit (RPL) instead of HCM, does not necessarily lead to biased willingness to pay (WTP) estimates. Therefore, if the inclusion of a latent construct is not critical to the study, we suggest opting for more traditional and robust models such as RPL or Latent Class Models (LCM). The perceived benefits of gaining a better understanding of how latent factors influence decisions come with risks associated with defining and estimating an HCM. To improve the quality of research, we provide recommendations for future applications of HCM in environmental economics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
31
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Latent class choice models with an error structure: Investigating potential unobserved associations between latent segmentation and behavior generation Model choice and framing effects: Do discrete choice modeling decisions affect loss aversion estimates? A consistent moment equations for binary probit models with endogenous variables using instrumental variables Transformation-based flexible error structures for choice modeling
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1