The importance of regret minimization in the choice for renewable energy programmes: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment

Energy Economics

Volumn 63, Issue , 2017, Pages 253-260

  Boeri, Marco ^a,b   Longo, Alberto ^b,c  

^a RTI HEALTH SOLUTIONS   (United States)

^b QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

^c BASQUE CENTRE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE BC3   (Spain)

Author keywords

Discrete choice experiments; Greenhouse gas emissions; Random Regret Minimization; Random Utility Maximization; Renewable energy

Indexed keywords

ENERGY POLICY; GAS EMISSIONS; GREENHOUSE GASES;

DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES; ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS; RANDOM PARAMETERS LOGIT; RANDOM REGRET MINIMIZATIONS; RANDOM UTILITY MAXIMIZATIONS; RENEWABLE ENERGIES; UNOBSERVED HETEROGENEITY;

OUTAGES;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; EMISSION; GREENHOUSE GAS; LOGIT ANALYSIS; OPTIMIZATION;

EID: 85015280305     PISSN: 01409883     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2017.03.005     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Aidt, T.S., Economic voting and information. Elect. Stud. 19 (2000), 349–362.
2. Alberini, A., Longo, A., Valuing the cultural monuments of Armenia: Bayesian updating of prior beliefs in contingent valuation. Environ. Plan. A 41:2 (2009), 441–460.
3. Alemu, M.H., Mørkbak, M.R., Olsen, S.B., Jensen, C.L., Attending to the reasons for attribute non-attendance in choice experiments. Environ. Resour. Econ. 54:3 (2013), 333–359.
4. Araña, J.E., León, C.J., Understanding the use of non-compensatory decision rules in discrete choice experiments: the role of emotions. Ecol. Econ. 68:8–9 (2009), 2316–2326.
5. Bell, D.E., Regret in decision making under uncertainty. Oper. Res. 30:5 (1982), 961–981.
6. Bergmann, A., Hanley, N., Wright, R., Valuing the attributes of renewable energy investments. Energy Policy 34:9 (2006), 1004–1014.
7. Bergstrom, J.C., Stoll, J.R., Randall, A., The impact of information on environmental commodity valuation decisions. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 72:3 (1990), 614–621.
8. Bierlaire, M., BIOGEME: a free package for the estimation of discrete choice models. 2003.
9. Bierlaire, M., An introductory tutorial to BIOGEME Version 1.8. 2009 Monte Verita, Ascona, Switzerland.
10. Boeri, M., Masiero, L., Regret minimisation and utility maximisation in a freight transport context. Transportmetrica A 10:6 (2014), 548–560.
11. Boeri, M., Longo, A., Doherty, E., Hynes, S., Site choices in recreational demand: a matter of utility maximization or regret minimization?. J. Environ. Econ. Policy 1 (2012), 32–47.
12. Boeri, M., Longo, A., Grisolía, J.M., Hutchinson, W.G., Kee, F., The role of regret minimization in lifestyle choices affecting the risk of coronary heart disease. J. Health Econ. 32:1 (2013), 253–260.
13. Boeri, M., Scarpa, R., Chorus, C.G., Stated choices and benefit estimates in the context of traffic calming schemes: utility maximization, regret minimization, or both?. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 61 (2014), 121–135.
14. Boyle, K.J., Commodity specification and the framing of contingent-valuation questions. Land Econ. 65:1 (1989), 57–63.
15. Chorus, C.G., A new model of random regret minimization. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 10:2 (2010), 181–196.
16. Chorus, C.G., What about behaviour in travel demand modelling? An overview of recent progress. Transp. Lett. 4:2 (2012), 93–104.
17. Chorus, C.G., Random Regret-based Discrete Choice Modeling: A Tutorial. 2012, Springer Science & Business Media.
18. Chorus, C.G., Arentze, T.A., Timmermans, H.J.P., A random regret minimization model of travel choice. Transp. Res. B 42:1 (2008), 1–18.
19. Chorus, C.G., van Cranenburgh, S., Dekker, T., Random regret minimization for consumer choice research: assessment of empirical evidence. J. Bus. Res. 67 (2014), 2428–2436.
20. van Cranenburgh, S., Guevara, C.A., Chorus, C.G., New insights on random regret minimization models. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 74 (2015), 91–109.
21. De Bekker-Grob, E.W., Chorus, C.G., Random regret-based discrete choice modelling: an application to health care. PharmacoEconomics 31:7 (2013), 623–634.
22. DECC, The Carbon Plan: Delivering Our Low Carbon Future. 2011, Department of Energy and Climate Change, London.
23. DeShazo, J.R., Fermo, G., Implications of Rationally-adaptive Pre-choice Behaviour for the Design and Estimation of Choice Models. 2004, University of California, Los Angeles.
24. DTI, Our energy future — creating a low carbon economy. Energy White Paper, 2003, Department of Trade and Industry, London.
25. DTI, Quarterly Energy Prices. 2005, National Statistics Publication, Department of Trade and Industry June www.statistics.gov.uk.
26. Ferrini, S., Scarpa, R., Designs with a-priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice-experiments: a Monte Carlo study. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 53:3 (2007), 342–363.
27. Gao, Z., Schroeder, T.C., Effects of label information on consumer willingness-to-pay for food attributes. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 91:3 (2009), 795–809.
28. Gilovich, T., Medvec, V.H., The experience of regret: what, when, and why. Psychol. Rev. 102:2 (1995), 379–395.
29. Goett, A.A., Hudson, K., Train, K.E., Customers' choice among retail energy suppliers: the willingness-to-pay for service attributes. Energy J. 21:4 (2000), 1–28.
30. Guevara, C.A., Chorus, C.G., Ben-Akiva, M.E., Sampling of alternatives in random regret minimization models. Transp. Sci. 50:1 (2014), 306–321.
31. Harinck, F., Van Dijk, E., Van Beest, I., Mersmann, P., When gains loom larger than losses reversed loss aversion for small amounts of money. Psychol. Sci. 18:12 (2007), 1099–1105.
32. Hensher, D.A., Greene, W.H., Chorus, C.G., Random regret minimization or random utility maximization: an exploratory analysis in the context of automobile fuel choice. J. Adv. Transp. 47:7 (2013), 667–678.
33. Hess, S., Train, K., Polak, J., On the use of a modified Latin hypercube sampling (MLHS) method in the estimation of a mixed logit model for vehicle choice. Transp. Res. B Methodol 40:2 (2006), 147–167.
34. Hess, S., Stathopoulos, A., Daly, A., Allowing for heterogeneous decision rules in discrete choice models: an approach and four case studies. Transportation 39:3 (2012), 565–591.
35. IEA, Electricity Statistics. International Energy Agency Energy Statistics. available at http://www.iea.org/textbase/stats/electricityresult.asp, 2003.
36. Kahneman, D., Tversky, A., Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 1979, 263–291.
37. Kahneman, D., Tversky, A., The Psychology of Preferences. 1982, Scientific American.
38. Kuhfeld, W.K., Experimental Design: Efficiency, Coding, and Choice Designs. 2010, SAS.
39. Lawrence, C., Zhou, J., Tits, A., User's Guide for CFSQP Version 2.5: A C Code for Solving (Large Scale) Constrained Nonlinear (Minimax) Optimization Problems. Generating Iterates Satisfying All Inequality Constraints, 1997, University of Maryland, Institute for Systems Research.
40. Longo, A., Markandya, A., Petrucci, M., The internalization of externalities in the production of electricity: willingness to pay for the attributes of a policy for renewable energy. Ecol. Econ. 67:1 (2008), 140–152.
41. Loomes, G., Sugden, R., Regret-Theory: An alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. Econ J. 92:368 (1982), 805–824.
42. Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A., Swait, J.D., Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications. 2000, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
43. Manski, C.F., The structure of random utility models. Theor. Decis. 8:3 (1977), 229–254.
44. Mariel, P., Meyerhoff, J., Hess, S., Heterogeneous preferences toward landscape externalities of wind turbines — combining choices and attitudes in a hybrid model. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 41 (2015), 647–657.
45. McFadden, D., Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice-behaviour. Zarembka, P., (eds.) Frontiers in Econometrics, 1974, Academic Press, New York.
46. Meyerhoff, J., Ohl, C., Hartje, V., Landscape externalities from onshore wind power. Energy Policy 38:1 (2010), 82–92.
47. Office for National Statistics, Employee jobs by industry 1978-2005. London http://www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/tsdataset.asp?vlnk=341, 2005.
48. Roe, B., Teisl, M.F., Levy, A., Russell, M., US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity. Energy Policy 29:11 (2001), 917–925.
49. Rolfe, J., Bennett, J., Louviere, J., Stated values and reminders of substitute goods: testing for framing effects with choice modelling. Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 46 (2002), 1–20.
50. Scarpa, R., Willis, K.G., Willingness-to-pay for renewable energy: primary and discretionary choice of British households' for micro-generation technologies. Energy Econ. 32:1 (2010), 129–136.
51. Simonson, I., The influence of anticipating regret and responsibility on purchasing decisions. J. Consum. Res. 19:1 (1992), 105–119.
52. Spash, C., Hanley, N., Preferences, information and biodiversity preservation. Ecol. Econ. 12 (1995), 191–208.
53. Swait, J., Louviere, J., The role of the scale parameter in the estimation and comparison of multinomial logit models. J. Mark. Res. 30 (1993), 305–314.
54. Thiene, M., Boeri, M., Chorus, C.G., Random regret minimization: exploration of a new choice model for environmental and resource economics. Environ. Resour. Econ. 51:3 (2012), 413–429.
55. Thurstone, L.L., A law of comparative judgment. Psychol. Rev. 34 (1927), 273–286.
56. Train, K.E., Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. 2009, Cambridge University Press.
57. Zeelenberg, M., The use of crying over spilled milk: a note on the rationality and functionality of regret. Philos. Psychol. 12:3 (1999), 325–340.
58. Zeelenberg, M., Pieters, R., A theory of regret regulation 1.0. J. Consum. Psychol. 17:1 (2007), 3–18.