Table 4. DBDC WTP Estimates for the NRP
|
Explanatory Variables1 |
RDD Sample |
NPF Sample | ||
|
Coefficient P-Value |
Coefficient P |
-Value | ||
|
All Revenue |
0.52*** |
0.00 |
0.12*** |
"0.00 |
|
Low Visits |
-0.40*** |
0.01 |
-0.11*** |
0.00 |
|
Young |
0.12 |
0.27 |
-0.09* |
0.06 |
|
Old |
-0.01 |
0.47 |
-0.04** |
0.04 |
|
Male |
-0.09 |
0.24 |
-0.08** |
0.02 |
|
BS degree |
0.17 |
0.15 |
0.05 |
0.14 |
|
Professional degree |
0.08 |
0.33 |
0.09** |
0.04 |
|
Low Income |
-0.10 |
0.27 |
-0.19*** |
0.00 |
|
White |
0.06 |
0.43 |
-0.02 |
0.39 |
|
Hispanic |
0.77** |
0.02 |
0.07 |
0.31 |
|
Asian |
0.62 |
0.12 |
-0.16 |
0.12 |
|
African American |
-0.66* |
0.09 |
0.32 |
0.14 |
|
NE |
-0.24 |
0.22 |
0.02 |
0.38 |
|
ENC |
-0.23 |
0.17 |
-0.03 |
0.34 |
|
WNC |
-0.40** |
0.04 |
-0.04 |
0.27 |
|
GP |
-0.18 |
0.26 |
-0.12* |
0.09 |
|
SE |
-0.07 |
0.38 |
-0.02 |
0.34 |
|
WSC |
-0.40* |
0.10 |
-0.06 |
0.31 |
|
SW |
0.02 |
0.47 |
0.04 |
0.30 |
|
______RM_____ |
________0.21__________ |
0.19 |
0.05_________ |
0.21 |
|
Heteroscedasticity (Hd) Results | ||||
|
Constant |
-0.22 |
0.22 |
-0.57*** |
0.00 |
|
Initial Bid |
0.003 |
0.19 |
-0.01*** |
0.00 |
|
Hd Likelihood Ratio |
0.76 |
0.38 |
14.34*** |
0.00 |
|
Summary Statistics | ||||
|
Sample Size 462 Likelihood Ratio Statistic 45.97*** Pseudo-R2 0.056 Mean WTP $42.28 ______Median WTP_______________$34.93_________ |
1461 65.07*** 0.024 $94.52 _________$95.63 | |||
Notes. (***), (**), and (*) refer to statistical significance at the 1, 5 and 10 percent levels. The
estimation was carried out using the Constrained Maximum Likelihood (CML 2.0) package in
Gauss version 3.5. The nonlinear optimization routine was Newton-Raphson with a convergence
criterion of 1×10-5 for the gradient of the coefficients. The estimates for “don’t know” and
“missing” dummy variables are not shown. 1Although not explicitly listed as an explanatory
variable, we control for BID in creating the probabilities that enter the likelihood function. See
Cameron and James [1987] for further details. Protest households are defined as those who refused
the NRP for free and are excluded from the analysis.
29
More intriguing information
1. TINKERING WITH VALUATION ESTIMATES: IS THERE A FUTURE FOR WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT MEASURES?2. Cyclical Changes in Short-Run Earnings Mobility in Canada, 1982-1996
3. AN EXPLORATION OF THE NEED FOR AND COST OF SELECTED TRADE FACILITATION MEASURES IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC IN THE CONTEXT OF THE WTO NEGOTIATIONS
4. Benefits of travel time savings for freight transportation : beyond the costs
5. Inflation and Inflation Uncertainty in the Euro Area
6. The name is absent
7. Transport system as an element of sustainable economic growth in the tourist region
8. Pursuit of Competitive Advantages for Entrepreneurship: Development of Enterprise as a Learning Organization. International and Russian Experience
9. Learning-by-Exporting? Firm-Level Evidence for UK Manufacturing and Services Sectors
10. Evaluation of the Development Potential of Russian Cities