Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Accounting for Latent Attitudes in Willingness-to-Pay Studies: The Case of Coastal Water Quality Improvements in Tobago

  • Published:
Environmental and Resource Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The study of human behaviour and in particular individual choices is of great interest in the field of environmental economics. Substantial attention has been paid to the way in which preferences vary across individuals, and there is a realisation that such differences are at least in part due to underlying attitudes and convictions. While this has been confirmed in empirical work, the methods typically employed are based on the arguably misguided use of responses to attitudinal questions as direct measures of underlying attitudes. As discussed in other literature, especially in transport research, this potentially leads to measurement error and endogeneity bias, and attitudes should rather be treated as latent variables. In this paper, we illustrate the use of such an Integrated Choice and Latent Variable model in the context of beach visitors’ willingness-to-pay for improvements in water quality. We show how a latent attitudinal variable, which we refer to as a pro-intervention attitude, helps explain both the responses from the stated choice exercise as well as answers to various rating questions related to respondent attitudes. The incorporation of the latent variable leads to important gains in model fit and substantially different willingness-to-pay patterns.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abou-Zeid M, Ben-Akiva M, Bierlaire M, Choudhury C, Hess S (2010) Attitudes and value of time heterogeneity. In: Vande Voorde E, Vanelslander T (eds) Applied transport economics—a management and policy perspective. De Boeck, forthcoming, pp 525–548

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich G, Grimsrud K, Thacher J, Kotchen M (2007) Relating environmental attitudes and contingent values: how robust are methods for identifying preference heterogeneity?. Environ Res Econ 374: 757–775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez-Daziano R, Bolduc D (2009) Canadian consumers perceptual and attitudinal responses toward green automobile technologies: an application of hybrid choice models, 2009 EAERE-FEEM-VIU European Summer School in Resources and Environmental Economics: Economics, Transport and Environment Venice International University

  • Ashok K, Dillon WR, Yuan S (2002) Extending discrete choice models to incorporate attitudinal and other latent variables. J Mark Res 39(1): 31–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker G, Burnham T (2001) Consumer response to genetically modified foods: market segment analysis and implications for producers and policy makers. J Agric Resour Econ 26(2): 387–403

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck M, Rose J, Hensher D (2010) Identifying response bias in stated preference surveys: attitudinal influences in emissions charging and vehicle selection. Institute of Transport and Logistics Sudies, University of Sydney

  • Beharry N (2008) Valuing benefits of improved coastal water quality for beach recreationists in tobago : a discrete choice experiment application. PhD thesis, University of York, UK

  • Beharry-Borg N, Hensher DA, Scarpa R (2009) An analytical framework for joint versus separate decisions by couples in choice experiments: the case of coastal water quality in tobago. Environ Resour Econ 43: 95–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beharry-Borg N, Scarpa R (2010) Valuing quality changes in Caribbean coastal waters for heterogeneous beach visitors. Ecol Econ 69: 1124–1139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Akiva M, McFadden D, Gärling T, Gopinath D, Walker J, Bolduc D, Börsch-Supan A, Delquié P, Larichev O, Morikawa T et al (1999) Extended framework for modeling choice behavior. Mark Lett 10(3): 187–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Akiva M, McFadden D, Train K, Walker J, Bhat C, Bierlaire M, Bolduc D, Boersch-Supan A, Brownstone D, Bunch DS et al (2002) Hybrid choice models: progress and challenges. Mark Lett 13(3): 163–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolduc D, Ben-Akiva M, Walker J, Michaud A (2005) Hybrid choice models with logit kernel: applicability to large scale models. In: Lee-Gosselin M, Doherty S (eds) Integrated land-use and transportation models: behavioural foundations. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 275–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Boxall P, Adamowicz W (2002) Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: a latent class approach. Environ Resour Econ 23: 421–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breffle W, Morey E, Thacher J (2005) Combining attitudinal and choice data to improve estimates of preferences and preference heterogeneity: a FIML, discrete-choice, latent-class model, working paper Department of Economics. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly A, Hess S, Train K (in press) Assuring finite moments for willingness to pay estimates from random coefficients models. Transportation. 10.1007/s11116-011-9331-3

  • Daly AJ, Hess S, Patruni B, Potoglou D, Rohr C (in press) Using ordered attitudinal indicators in a latent variable choice model: a study of the impact of security on rail travel behaviour. Transportation. 10.1007/s11116-011-9351-z

  • Doornik JA (2001) Ox: an object-oriented matrix language. Timberlake Consultants Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Eid J, Langeheine R, Diener E (2003) Comparing typological structures across cultures by multigroup latent class analysisa primer. J Cross Cult Psychol 342: 195–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fosgerau M, Bjørner TB (2006) Joint models for noise annoyance and willingness to pay for road noise reduction. Transp Res Part B 40: 164–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green P (1984) Hybrid models for conjoint analysis: an expository review. J Mark Res 21: 155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene WH, Hensher DA (2003) A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit. Transp Res Part B 37(8): 681–698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess S, Rose J (2008) Should reference alternatives in pivot design SC surveys be treated differently?. Environ Resour Econ 42: 297–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson MV, Heldt T, Johansson P (2005) Latent variables in a travel mode choice model: attitudinal and behavioural indicator variables, working paper Department of Economics. Uppsala University, Sweden

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansson MV, Heldt T, Johansson P (2006) The effects of attitudes and personality traits on mode choice. Transp Res Part A 40(6): 507–525

    Google Scholar 

  • Keane M, Harris K (1999) A model of health plan choice: inferring preferences and perceptions from a combination of revealed preference and attitudinal data. J Econom 89: 131–157

    Google Scholar 

  • Menezes LD, Bartholomew D (1996) New developments in latent structure analysis applied to social attitudes. J R Stat Soc 1592(Series A): 213224

    Google Scholar 

  • Milon JW, Scrogin D (2006) Latent preferences and valuation of wetland ecosystem restoration. Ecol Econ 56: 162–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morey E (1981) The demand for site-specific recreational activities: A characteristics approach. J Environ Econ Manag 8: 345–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morey E, Thacher J, Breffle W (2006) Using angling characteristics and attitudinal data to identify environmental preference classes: a latent class model. Environ Resour Econ 34: 91–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morey E, Thiene M, Salvo MD, Signorello G (2008) Using attitudinal data to identify latent classes that vary in their preference for landscape preservation. Ecol Econ 68: 536–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennings J, Leuthold R (2000) The role of farmers behavioral attitudes and heterogeneity in futures contracts usage. J Agric Econ 82(4): 908–919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Temme D, Paulssen M, Dannewald T (2008) Incorporating latent variables into discrete choice models a simultaneous estimation approach using SEM software. Bus Res 1: 220–237

    Google Scholar 

  • Thacher J, Morey E, Craighead W (2005) Using patient characteristics and attitudinal data to identify treatment preference groups: a latent-class model. Depress Anxiety 212: 47–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Train K (2009) Discrete choice methods with simulation, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamaguchi K (2000) Multinomial logit latent-class regression models: an analysis of the predictors of gender-role attitudes among japanese women. Am J Sociol 1056: 1702–1740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yáñez M, Raveau S, de D. Ortúzar J (2010) Inclusion of latent variables in mixed logit models: modelling and forecasting. Transp Res Part A 44(9): 744–753

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

    Stephane Hess

  2. Sustainable Resources Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

    Nesha Beharry-Borg

Authors
  1. Stephane Hess
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nesha Beharry-Borg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephane Hess.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hess, S., Beharry-Borg, N. Accounting for Latent Attitudes in Willingness-to-Pay Studies: The Case of Coastal Water Quality Improvements in Tobago. Environ Resource Econ 52, 109–131 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-011-9522-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-011-9522-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation