An estimation of the future demand for portable Internet service in Korea

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 73, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 575-587

  Yoo, Seung Hoon ^a   Moon, Hye Seon ^b  

^a Hoseo University   (South Korea)

^b Korea Institute of Science and Technology Evaluation and Planning (KISTEP)   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation; Dichotomous choice; Portable Internet service; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

ECONOMICS; ESTIMATION; INFORMATION SERVICES; MARKETING;

CONTINGENT VALUATION; DICHOTOMOUS CHOICE; KOREA; PORTABLE INTERNET SERVICE (PIS); WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

INTERNET;

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; INTERNET;

ASIA; EURASIA; FAR EAST; KOREA;

EID: 33646067461     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2005.07.009     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Lilien G.L., and Kotler P. Marketing Decision Making: A Model-Building Approach (1983), Harper and Row Publishers Inc., New York
2. M. Das, Extensions of the ordered response model applied to consumer valuation of new products, Working Paper, Department of Econometrics, Tilburg University, 1995.
3. Batt C.E., and Katz J.E. A conjoint model of enhanced voice mail services: implications for new service development and forecasting. Telecommun. Policy 21 (1997) 743-760
4. Urban G.L., and Hauser J.R. Design and Marketing of New Products. 2nd ed. (1993), Prentice-Hall Inc, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
5. Cameron T.A., and James M.D. Estimating willingness to pay from survey data: an alternative pre-test-market evaluation procedure. J. Mark. Res. 24 (1987) 389-395
6. Yoo S.-H. Extending dichotomous choice contingent valuation methods to pre-test-market evaluation: the case of a cable television service. Appl. Econ. Lett. 9 (2002) 315-318
7. Silk A.J., and Urban G.L. Pre-test-market evaluation of new packages goods: a model and measurement methodology. J. Mark. Res. 15 (1978) 171-191
8. Mitchell R.C., and Carson R.T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method (1989), Resources for the Future, Washington DC
9. Randall A. The possibility of satisfactory benefit estimation with contingent markets. In: Cummings R.G., Brookshire D.S., and Schulze W.D. (Eds). Valuing Environmental Goods: An Assessment of the Contingent Valuation Method (1986), Towman and Allanheld, Totowa, NJ 114-122
10. Gonzalez-Caban A., and Loomis J. Economic benefits of maintaining ecological integrity of Rio Mameyes, in Puerto Rico. Ecol. Econ. 21 (1997) 63-75
11. Roe B., Boyle K.J., and Teisl M.F. Using conjoint analysis to derive estimates of compensating variation. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 31 (1996) 145-159
12. Yoo S.-H., and Chae K.-S. Measuring the economic benefits of the ozone pollution control policy in Seoul: results of a contingent valuation survey. Urban Studies 38 (2001) 49-60
13. Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P.R., Leamer E.E., Radner R., and Schuman H. Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (1993), U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC
14. Hanemann W.M. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 66 (1984) 332-341
15. Willig R.D. Consumer surplus without apology. Am. Econ. Rev. 66 (1976) 587-597
16. Cameron T.A., and James M.D. Efficient estimation methods for closed-ended contingent valuation surveys. Rev. Econ. Stat. 69 (1987) 269-276
17. McConnell K.E. Models for referendum data: the structure of discrete choice models for contingent valuation. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 18 (1990) 19-34
18. Krinsky I., and Robb A.L. On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. Rev. Econ. Stat. 68 (1986) 715-719