A joint model for vehicle type and fuel type choice: Evidence from a cross-nested logit study

Transportation

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 593-625

  Hess, Stephane ^a   Fowler, Mark ^b   Adler, Thomas ^b   Bahreinian, Aniss ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b RESOURCE SYSTEMS GROUP INC   (United States)

^c CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION   (United States)

Author keywords

Alternative fuel; Cross nested logit; Fuel type choice; Stated preference; Vehicle type choice

Indexed keywords

ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLES; CALIFORNIA; CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; CHOICE PROCESS; CONSUMER RESPONSE; CORRELATION PATTERNS; CORRELATION STRUCTURE; CROSS-NESTED LOGIT; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; FUEL TYPE CHOICE; FUEL TYPES; JOINT MODELS; NESTED LOGIT MODEL; STATED PREFERENCE; STATED PREFERENCE SURVEYS; VEHICLE TYPE CHOICE; VEHICLE TYPES;

ALTERNATIVE FUELS; GAS EMISSIONS; GREENHOUSE GASES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

VEHICLES;

ALTERNATIVE FUEL; AUTOMOBILE; CORRELATION; DEMAND ANALYSIS; EMISSION INVENTORY; FUEL CONSUMPTION; GREENHOUSE GAS; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; LOGIT ANALYSIS; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR;

CALIFORNIA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84859268701     PISSN: 00494488     EISSN: 15729435     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11116-011-9366-5     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Adler, T., Wargelin, L., Kostyniuk, L., Kavalec, C., Occhiuzzo, G.: Experimental assessment of incentives for alternate fuel vehicles. Presented at the Transportation Research Board annual meeting, Washington, DC, January 2004.
2. Batley, R., Toner, J.: Elimination-by-aspects and advanced logit models of stated preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles. In: Proceedings of the European Transport Conference, Strasbourg, October 2003.
3. Batley, R., Toner, J., Knight, M.: A mixed logit model of UK household demand for alternative-fuel vehicles. Int. J. Transp. Econ. 31(1), 55-77 (2004).
4. Ben-Akiva, M., Bierlaire, M.: Discrete choice methods and their applications to short term travel decisions. In: Hall, R. (ed) Handbook of Transportation Science, chapter 2, pp. 5-34. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1999).
5. Bierlaire, M.: A theoretical analysis of the cross-nested logit model. Ann. Oper. Res. 144, 287-300 (2006).
6. Bierlaire, M.: An introduction to BIOGEME Version 1. 4. biogeme. ep. ch (2005).
7. Bowman, J. L.: Logit kernel (or mixed logit) models for large multidimensional choice problems: identification and estimation. Paper presented at the 83rd annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (2004).
8. Bunch, D. S., Bradley, M., Golob, T. F., Kitamura, R., Occhiuzzo, G. P.: Demand for clean fueled vehicles in California: a discrete choice, stated preference survey. Transp. Res. Part A 27A, 237-253 (1993).
9. Daly, A. J., Hess, S.: Simple approaches for random utility modelling with panel data. Paper presented at the European transport conference, Glasgow, October 2010.
10. Daly, A., Zachary, S.: Improved multiple choice models. In: Hensher, D., Dalvi, M. (eds.) Determinants of Travel Choice. Saxon House, Sussex (1978).
11. Daly, A. J., Hess, S., Train, K. E.: Assuring finite moments for willingness to pay in random coefficients models. Transportation (2011a, forthcoming).
12. Daly, A. J., Hess, S., de Jong, G.: Calculating errors for measures derived from choice modelling estimates. Transp. Res. Part B (2011b, accepted for publication).
13. Erath, A., Axhausen, K. W.: Long Term Fuel Price Elasticity: Effects on Mobility Tool Ownership and Residential Location Choice, Final Report to BFE and BAFU, IVT. ETH Zurich, Zurich (2010).
14. Fowler, M., Adler, T.: Transportation fuel demand forecast household and commercial fleet survey task 8 report: logistic regression analysis and results. Report for the California Energy Commission (2009).
15. Golob, T., Brownstone, D., Bunch, D., Kitamura, R.: Forecasting electric vehicle ownership and use in the California South Coast Air Basin. Report to the Southern California Edison Company (1995).
16. Greene, D. L.: TAFV Alternative Fuels and Vehicles Choice Model Documentation. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge (2001).
17. Hess, S., Polak, J. W.: Exploring the potential for cross-nesting structures in airport-choice analysis: a case-study of the Greater London area. Transp. Res. Part E 42, 63-81 (2006).
18. Hess, S., Bierlaire, M., Polak, J. W.: Capturing taste heterogeneity and correlation structure with Mixed GEV models. In: Scarpa, R., Alberini, A. (eds.) Applications of Simulation Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics, chapter 4, pp. 55-76. Springer Publisher, Dordrecht (2005a).
19. Hess, S., Bierlaire, M., Polak, J. W.: Estimation of value of travel-time savings using mixed logit models. Transp. Res. Part A 39(2-3), 221-236 (2005b).
20. Kavalec, C.: CALCARS: The California Conventional and Alternative Fuel Response Simulator, A Nested Multinomial Vehicle Choice and Demand Model. California Energy Commission, Sacramento (1996).
21. Louviere, J. J., Hensher, D. A., Swait, J. D.: Stated Choice Methods-Analysis and Application. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000).
22. McFadden, D.: Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka, P. (ed.) Frontiers in Econometrics, pp. 105-142. Academic Press, New York (1974).
23. McFadden, D.: Modeling the choice of residential location. In: Karlqvist, A., Lundqvist, L., Snickars, F., Weibull, J. (eds.) Spatial Interaction Theory and Planning Models, pp. 75-96. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1978).
24. McFadden, D., Train, K.: Mixed MNL Models for discrete response. J. Appl. Econom. 15, 447-470 (2000).
25. Papola, A.: Some developments on the cross nested logit model. Transp. Res. Part B 38, 833-851 (2004).
26. Spissu, E., Pinjari, A., Pendyala, R., Bhat, C.: A copula-based joint multinomial discrete-continuous model of vehicle type choice and miles of travel. Transportation 36(4), 403-422 (2009).
27. Tompkins, M., Bunch, D., Santini, D., Bradley, M., Vyas, A., Poyer, D.: Determinants of Alternative Fuel Vehicle Choice in the Continental United States, TRR 1641, pp. 130-138 (1998).
28. Train, K.: California Personal Vehicle Energy Demand Model. California Energy Commission, Sacramento (1983).
29. Train, K. E.: Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003).
30. Vovsha, P.: Application of a cross-nested logit model to mode choice in Tel Aviv, Israel, Metropolitan Area. Transp. Res. Rec. 1607, 6-15 (1997).
31. Vovsha, P., Bekhor, S.: The link-nested logit model of route choice: overcoming the route overlapping problem. Transp. Res. Rec. 1645, 133-142 (1998).
32. Walker, J.: Extended discrete choice models: integrated framework, flexible error structures, and latent variables. PhD thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MA (2001).
33. Walker, J.: Mixed logit (or logit kernel) model: dispelling misconceptions of identification. Transp. Res. Rec. 1805, 86-98 (2002).
34. Walker, J., Ben-Akiva, M., Bolduc, D.: Identification of the Logit Kernel (or Mixed Logit) Model. Working paper, Department of Civil Engineering, MIT, Cambridge, MA (2003).
35. Wen, C.-H., Koppelman, F. S.: The generalized nested logit model. Transp. Res. Part B 35(7), 627-641 (2001).
36. Williams, H.: On the formation of travel demand models and economic evaluation measures of user benefits. Environ. Plan. A 9, 285-344 (1977).