scholarly journals Estimation of the value of time for automated driving using revealed and stated preference methods

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 35-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viktoriya Kolarova ◽  
Felix Steck ◽  
Rita Cyganski ◽  
Stefan Trommer
Keyword(s):  
Stated Preference ◽  
Value Of Time ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
Stated Preference Methods

scholarly journals Households' valuation of power outages in major cities of Ethiopia: An application of stated preference methods

2021 ◽  
pp. 105527
Author(s):  
Tensay Hadush Meles ◽  
Alemu Mekonnen ◽  
Abebe D. Beyene ◽  
Sied Hassen ◽  
Subhrendu K. Pattanayak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stated Preference ◽  
Power Outages ◽  
Stated Preference Methods

scholarly journals Value of Time for Commercial Vehicle Operators

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Smalkoski ◽  
David Levinson
Keyword(s):  
Commercial Vehicle ◽  
Stated Preference ◽  
Tobit Model ◽  
Trucking Industry ◽  
Value Of Time ◽  
Distribution Of Values ◽  
Survey Interviews

Value of time was estimated for commercial vehicle operators in Minnesota to quantify the effects of spring load restrictions. A sample was constructed from several trucking industry sources to conduct a survey. Interviews were conducted using an adaptive stated preference (ASP) survey to derive an estimate to the nearest dollar. A tobit model was fit to the data from the interviews to derive the estimate for value of time, $49.42 per hour. Variation in the distribution of values is explained in part by fleet operation: whether the firm operates as a for-hire carrier or a private carrier.

A comparison of hedonic price and stated preference methods to derive monetary values for aircraft noise disturbance and annoyance

2013 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 40-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan Carles Blanco Matos ◽  
Ian Flindell ◽  
Paul Le Masurier ◽  
Chris Pownall
Keyword(s):  
Stated Preference ◽  
Aircraft Noise ◽  
Hedonic Price ◽  
Stated Preference Methods ◽  
Noise Disturbance

Economics and the Endangered Species Act

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joe Kerkvliet
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Economic Analysis ◽  
Stated Preference ◽  
Species Conservation ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Economic Costs ◽  
Cost Estimates ◽  
Stated Preference Methods

Economics plays strong roles in the design, implementation, and evaluation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). First, the ESA’s language allows for economic analysis of critical habitat designations, recovery plan implementations, listing postponements, and the design of habitat-conservation plans. Extensive administrative changes to the ESA in the 1990s were designed to reduce economic costs and to elicit landowners’ cooperation. These reforms were partly motivated and guided by economic analysis. Second, economic analysis plays a role in providing credible estimates of the economic costs of ESA implementation. Cost estimates are highly variable and likely to depend on species’ characteristics and the effectiveness of recovery programs. Emerging evidence suggests that the 1990 reforms are reducing costs and increasing effectiveness. Third, economic science contributes to estimation of benefits. Because of the “public goods” nature of nearly all ecosystem and species conservation efforts, estimates must be based on stated preference methods. This use leads to difficulties in establishing the authenticity of benefits estimates. Also, research suggests that benefits estimates are highly sensitive to the spatial nature of the market (beneficiaries’ geographic locations). Future research needs to tackle both authenticity and spatial issues. Fourth, benefit–cost analysis (BCA) is required by law to inform many resource decisions affecting ecosystem and species conservation. Four illustrative BCAs show that whether benefits exceed costs is highly dependent on the authenticity of benefits based on stated preference methods and assumptions about the spatial nature of the market. Substantial uncertainty accompanies both benefit and cost estimates.

Stated Preference Methods for Valuation of Forest Attributes

2003 ◽  
pp. 321-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas P. Holmes ◽  
Kevin J. Boyle
Keyword(s):  
Stated Preference ◽  
Stated Preference Methods ◽  
Forest Attributes

scholarly journals The role of interdisciplinary collaboration for stated preference methods to value marine environmental goods and ecosystem services

2018 ◽  
Vol 201 ◽  
pp. 140-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Börger ◽  
Anne Böhnke-Henrichs ◽  
Caroline Hattam ◽  
Joanna Piwowarczyk ◽  
Femke Schasfoort ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Stated Preference ◽  
Interdisciplinary Collaboration ◽  
Stated Preference Methods ◽  
Environmental Goods ◽  
Marine Environmental

State of the Art of Contingent Valuation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Haab ◽  
Lynne Lewis ◽  
John Whitehead
Keyword(s):  
Contingent Valuation ◽  
Discrete Choice ◽  
Stated Preference ◽  
Revealed Preference ◽  
Choice Experiments ◽  
Discrete Choice Experiments ◽  
Actual Behavior ◽  
Stated Preference Methods ◽  
Valuation Methods ◽  
Hypothetical Scenario

The contingent valuation method (CVM) is a stated preference approach to the valuation of non-market goods. It has a 50+-year history beginning with a clever suggestion to simply ask people for their consumer surplus. The first study was conducted in the 1960s and over 10,000 studies have been conducted to date. The CVM is used to estimate the use and non-use values of changes in the environment. It is one of the more flexible valuation methods, having been applied in a large number of contexts and policies. The CVM requires construction of a hypothetical scenario that makes clear what will be received in exchange for payment. The scenario must be realistic and consequential. Economists prefer revealed preference methods for environmental valuation due to their reliance on actual behavior data. In unguarded moments, economists are quick to condemn stated preference methods due to their reliance on hypothetical behavior data. Stated preference methods should be seen as approaches to providing estimates of the value of certain changes in the allocation of environmental and natural resources for which no other method can be used. The CVM has a tortured history, having suffered slings and arrows from industry-funded critics following the Exxon Valdez and British Petroleum (BP)–Deepwater Horizon oil spills. The critics have harped on studies that fail certain tests of hypothetical bias and scope, among others. Nonetheless, CVM proponents have found that it produces similar value estimates to those estimated from revealed preference methods such as the travel cost and hedonic methods. The CVM has produced willingness to pay (WTP) estimates that exhibit internal validity. CVM research teams must have a range of capabilities. A CVM study involves survey design so that the elicited WTP estimates have face validity. Questionnaire development and data collection are skills that must be mastered. Welfare economic theory is used to guide empirical tests of theory such as the scope test. Limited dependent variable econometric methods are often used with panel data to test value models and develop estimates of WTP. The popularity of the CVM is on the wane; indeed, another name for this article could be “the rise and fall of CVM,” not because the CVM is any less useful than other valuation methods. It is because the best practice in the CVM is merging with discrete choice experiments, and researchers seem to prefer to call their approach discrete choice experiments. Nevertheless, the problems that plague discrete choice experiments are the same as those that plague contingent valuation. Discrete choice experiment–contingent valuation–stated preference researchers should continue down the same familiar path of methods development.

scholarly journals Potential Crash Rate Benchmarks for Automated Vehicles

2021 ◽  
pp. 036119812110098
Author(s):  
Noah J. Goodall
Keyword(s):  
Stated Preference ◽  
Average Rate ◽  
Crash Risk ◽  
Automated Vehicles ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
The Public ◽  
Crash Rates ◽  
Potential Safety ◽  
Transportation Modes ◽  
Driving Task

Most automobile manufacturers and several technology companies are testing automated vehicles (AVs) on public roads. While automation of the driving task is expected to reduce crashes, there is no consensus as to how safe an AV must be before it can be deployed. An AV should be at least as safe as the average driver, but national crash rates include drunk and distracted driving, meaning that an AV that crashes at the average rate is somewhere between drunk and sober. In this paper, safety benchmarks for AVs are explored from three perspectives. First, crash rates from naturalistic driving studies are used to determine the crash risk of the model (i.e., sober, rested, attentive, cautious) driver. Second, stated preference surveys in the literature are reviewed to estimate the AV risk acceptable to the public. Third, crash, injury, and fatality rates from other transportation modes are compared as baseline safety levels. A range of potential safety targets is presented as a guide for policymakers, regulators, and AV developers to assist in evaluating the safety of automated driving technologies for public use.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document