Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics

Carlsson, Fredrik; Martinsson, Peter

doi:10.1002/hec.729

Cited by 296 publications

(210 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

192

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The choice sets were created with a linear D-optimal design principle (Huber and Zwerina 1996;Carlsson and Martinsson 2003). In total, 16 choice sets were generated, with two alternatives in each set.…”

Section: Historical Emissions Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

A fair share: Burden-sharing preferences in the United States and China

Carlsson

Kataria²,

Krupnick

et al. 2013

Resource and Energy Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a choice experiment, we investigated preferences for distributing the economic burden of decreasing CO 2 emissions in the two largest CO 2 -emitting countries: the United States and China. We asked respondents about their preferences for four burden-sharing rules to reduce CO 2 emissions according to their country's 1) historical emissions, 2) income level, 3) equal right to emit per person, and 4) current emissions. We found that U.S. respondents preferred the rule based on current emissions, while the equal right to emit rule was clearly least preferred. The Chinese respondents, on the other hand, preferred the historical rule, while the current emissions rule was the least preferred. Respondents overall favored the rule that was least costly for their country. These marked differences may explain the difficulties countries face in agreeing how to share costs, presenting a tough hurdle to overcome in future negotiations. We also found that the strength of the preferences was much stronger in China, suggesting that how mitigation costs are shared across countries is more important there.

show abstract

Section: Historical Emissions Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

A fair share: Burden-sharing preferences in the United States and China

Carlsson

Kataria²,

Krupnick

et al. 2013

Resource and Energy Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Carlsson and Martinsson (2003)]. Using this optimization procedure and incorporating several restrictions, the number of alternatives was reduced to 35 and randomly split into five groups.…”

Section: Shares Of Benefits Going Tomentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Religious Beliefs Explain Preferences for Income Redistribution? Experimental Evidence

Neustadt¹

2011

CESifo Economic Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to the mixed empirical evidence bearing on the economic determinants, beliefs have been at the center of attention of research into preferences for income redistribution. We elicit preferences for income redistribution through a Discrete Choice Experiment performed in 2008 in Switzerland and relate them to several behavioral determinants, in particular to religious beliefs. Estimated marginal willingness to pay (WTP) is positive among those who do not belong to a religious denomination, and negative otherwise. However, the marginal WTP is shown to increase with a higher degree of religiosity.Moreover, those who state that luck or connections play a crucial role in determining economic success exhibit significantly higher WTP values than those who deem effort to be decisive.

show abstract

“…On the basis of all possible combinations in the full factorial design, 64 choice sets with two alternatives were constructed using a D-optimal design algorithm (Carlsson and Martinsson 2003) allowing for all possible two-way interactions to be estimated. The 64 choice sets were randomly blocked into eight versions, which imply that each respondent was faced with eight choice sets.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Valuation of small and multiple health risks: A critical analysis of SP data applied to food and water safety

Andersson

Hole

Svensson

2016

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study elicits individual preferences for reducing morbidity and mortality risk in the context of an infectious disease (campylobacter) using choice experiments. Respondents are in the survey asked to choose between different policies that, in addition to the two health risks, also vary with respect to source of disease being targeted (food or water), when the policy takes place (in time), and the monetary cost. Our results in our baseline model are in line with expectations; respondents prefer the benefits of the program sooner than later, programs that reduce both the mortality and morbidity risk, and less costly programs. Moreover, our results suggest that respondents prefer water-compared with food-safety programs. However, a main objective of this study is to examine scope sensitivity of mortality risk reductions using a novel approach. Our results from a split-sample design suggest that the value of the mortality risk reduction, defined as the value of a statistical life, is SEK 3 177 (USD 483 million) and SEK 50 million (USD 8 million), respectively, in our two sub-samples. This result cast doubt on the standard scope sensitivity tests in choice experiments, and the results also cast doubt on the validity and reliability of VSL estimates based on stated preference (and revealed preference) studies in general. This is important due to the large empirical literature on non-market evaluation and the elicited values' central role in policy making, such as benefit-cost analysis.

show abstract

Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics

Cited by 296 publications

References 16 publications

A fair share: Burden-sharing preferences in the United States and China

A fair share: Burden-sharing preferences in the United States and China

Do Religious Beliefs Explain Preferences for Income Redistribution? Experimental Evidence

Valuation of small and multiple health risks: A critical analysis of SP data applied to food and water safety

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About