夫妻对食物的个人偏好:用真实购买数据验证选择实验预测

IF 2.6 3区 经济学 Q2 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY
Cristiano Franceschinis, Riccardo Scarpa, Mara Thiene, Roselinde Kessels
{"title":"夫妻对食物的个人偏好:用真实购买数据验证选择实验预测","authors":"Cristiano Franceschinis,&nbsp;Riccardo Scarpa,&nbsp;Mara Thiene,&nbsp;Roselinde Kessels","doi":"10.1111/1467-8489.12600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Despite the popularity of choice experiments (CEs) for the valuation of environmental goods and services, some of its shortcomings have been only partially addressed by the literature. Among these, of particular saliency are the hypothetical nature of CEs and the lack of information on joint choices (e.g. choices made by couples) in traditional CEs. In this study, we contribute to filling these gaps by investigating joint choices concerning cheeses produced via different processes, involving environmental and social sustainability features. We use a two-stage preference elicitation approach, using first stated and then real consumption choices collected from a sample of 90 couples. In the first stage, each member of the couples separately took part in a web survey with a hypothetical CE. In the second, these couples jointly engaged in a field experiment with monetary incentives in which they jointly chose the cheeses to purchase. This approach allows us to evaluate the role of individual preferences in shaping joint choices and to investigate whether predictions from stated choice data are congruent with, and validated by, real purchase data. We use CE data to estimate individual preferences with discrete choice models and use joint purchase data via the Multiple Discrete-Continuous Nested Extreme Value model. Results suggest that joint real choices follow a substantively different decision process from that of individual stated choices.</p>","PeriodicalId":55427,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"69 1","pages":"7-24"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Individual preferences for food items within couples: Validating choice experiments predictions with real purchases data\",\"authors\":\"Cristiano Franceschinis,&nbsp;Riccardo Scarpa,&nbsp;Mara Thiene,&nbsp;Roselinde Kessels\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1467-8489.12600\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Despite the popularity of choice experiments (CEs) for the valuation of environmental goods and services, some of its shortcomings have been only partially addressed by the literature. Among these, of particular saliency are the hypothetical nature of CEs and the lack of information on joint choices (e.g. choices made by couples) in traditional CEs. In this study, we contribute to filling these gaps by investigating joint choices concerning cheeses produced via different processes, involving environmental and social sustainability features. We use a two-stage preference elicitation approach, using first stated and then real consumption choices collected from a sample of 90 couples. In the first stage, each member of the couples separately took part in a web survey with a hypothetical CE. In the second, these couples jointly engaged in a field experiment with monetary incentives in which they jointly chose the cheeses to purchase. This approach allows us to evaluate the role of individual preferences in shaping joint choices and to investigate whether predictions from stated choice data are congruent with, and validated by, real purchase data. We use CE data to estimate individual preferences with discrete choice models and use joint purchase data via the Multiple Discrete-Continuous Nested Extreme Value model. Results suggest that joint real choices follow a substantively different decision process from that of individual stated choices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55427,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics\",\"volume\":\"69 1\",\"pages\":\"7-24\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8489.12600\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8489.12600","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管选择实验(CEs)对环境商品和服务的估值很受欢迎,但它的一些缺点只是部分地被文献所解决。其中,特别突出的是传统消费决策的假设性质和缺乏关于共同选择(如夫妻做出的选择)的信息。在这项研究中,我们通过调查不同工艺生产的奶酪的联合选择,包括环境和社会可持续性特征,来填补这些空白。我们使用两阶段的偏好启发方法,首先使用从90对夫妇的样本中收集的陈述,然后使用真实的消费选择。在第一阶段,夫妻中的每一个成员分别参加了一个假设CE的网络调查。在第二项实验中,这些夫妇共同参与了一项有金钱奖励的实地实验,他们共同选择要购买的奶酪。这种方法使我们能够评估个人偏好在形成共同选择中的作用,并调查从陈述的选择数据中得出的预测是否与实际购买数据一致,并得到实际购买数据的验证。我们使用CE数据通过离散选择模型估计个人偏好,并通过多重离散连续嵌套极值模型使用联合购买数据。结果表明,联合实际选择遵循一个实质上不同的决策过程,从个人陈述的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Individual preferences for food items within couples: Validating choice experiments predictions with real purchases data

Despite the popularity of choice experiments (CEs) for the valuation of environmental goods and services, some of its shortcomings have been only partially addressed by the literature. Among these, of particular saliency are the hypothetical nature of CEs and the lack of information on joint choices (e.g. choices made by couples) in traditional CEs. In this study, we contribute to filling these gaps by investigating joint choices concerning cheeses produced via different processes, involving environmental and social sustainability features. We use a two-stage preference elicitation approach, using first stated and then real consumption choices collected from a sample of 90 couples. In the first stage, each member of the couples separately took part in a web survey with a hypothetical CE. In the second, these couples jointly engaged in a field experiment with monetary incentives in which they jointly chose the cheeses to purchase. This approach allows us to evaluate the role of individual preferences in shaping joint choices and to investigate whether predictions from stated choice data are congruent with, and validated by, real purchase data. We use CE data to estimate individual preferences with discrete choice models and use joint purchase data via the Multiple Discrete-Continuous Nested Extreme Value model. Results suggest that joint real choices follow a substantively different decision process from that of individual stated choices.

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
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
>24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics (AJARE) provides a forum for innovative and scholarly work in agricultural and resource economics. First published in 1997, the Journal succeeds the Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics and the Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, upholding the tradition of these long-established journals. Accordingly, the editors are guided by the following objectives: -To maintain a high standard of analytical rigour offering sufficient variety of content so as to appeal to a broad spectrum of both academic and professional economists and policymakers. -In maintaining the tradition of its predecessor journals, to combine articles with policy reviews and surveys of key analytical issues in agricultural and resource economics.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信