To tax or to ban? A discrete choice experiment to elicit public preferences for phasing out glyphosate use in agriculture

In 2023, the European Union will vote on the reauthorization of glyphosate use, renewed in 2017 despite concern on impacts on the environment and public health. A ban is supported by several Member States but rejected by most farmers. What are citizens’ preferences to phase out glyphosate? To assess whether taxation could be an alternative to a ban, we conducted a discrete choice experiment in five European countries. Our results reveal that the general public is strongly willing to pay for a reduction in glyphosate use. However, while 75.5% of respondents stated to support a ban in the pre-experimental survey, experimental results reveal that in 73.35% of cases, earmarked taxation schemes are preferred when they lead to a strong reduction in glyphosate use for an increase in food price lower than that induced by a ban. When glyphosate reduction is balanced against its costs, a tax may be preferred

Modeling Quality and Price Perception in the Choice of Drinking Water in France: A Hybrid Choice Model Approach

The water resources literature usually discards the important price difference between bottled water and tap water as a predictor of drinking water choice. In France, bottled water is about 100 times more expensive than tap water. Using 4,003 survey responses, we model water resources quality (mis)‐perception and water price (mis)‐perceptions by means of a hybrid choice model. We show that respondents who are more likely to consider the quality of water resources as “very poor” or “poor” are less likely to drink tap water. Furthermore, we find that respondents who do not report the correct price difference between tap water and bottled water are more likely to drink bottled water, which is a novel finding, as significant price effects of this type have never been reported in the literature on drinking water choice

A Contingent Valuation Test for Measuring the Construct Validity of Willingness-to-Pay Estimates Derived from Choice Experiments

We introduce a protocol for measuring the construct validity of competing willingness-to-pay (WTP) distributions derived from mixed logit models. The protocol is based on a two-round survey. Round 1 consists in a standard discrete choice experiment (DCE) sample survey, at the end of which competing models are estimated. Round 2 introduces additional respondents who, in addition to taking part in the DCE, are asked to identify the money value interval that better reflects their preferences using a set of values drawn from the estimated range of WTPs obtained from competing models estimated on the previous sample

A Contingent Valuation Test for Measuring the Construct Validity of Willingness-to-pay Estimates derived from choice-experiments

We introduce a protocol for measuring the construct validity of competing willingness-to-pay (WTP) distributions derived from mixed logit models. The protocol is based on a two-round survey. Round 1 consists in a standard discrete choice experiment (DCE) sample survey, at the end of which competing models are estimated. Round 2 introduces additional respondents who, in addition to taking part in the DCE, are asked to identify the money value interval that better reflects their preferences using a set of values drawn from the estimated range of WTPs obtained from competing models estimated on the previous sample

A contingent valuation test for measuring the construct validity of willingness-to-pay estimates derived from choice-experiments.

We introduce a protocol for measuring the construct validity of competing willingness-to-pay (WTP) distributions derived from mixed logit models. The protocol is based on a two-round survey. Round 1 consists in a standard discrete choice experiment (DCE) sample survey, at the end of which competing models are estimated. Round 2 introduces additional respondents who, in addition to taking part in the DCE, are asked to identify the money value interval that better reflects their preferences using a set of values drawn from the estimated range of WTPs obtained from competing models estimated on the previous sample

Erosive runoff events in the European Union: Using discrete choice experiment to assess the benefits of integrated management policies when preferences are heterogeneous

This paper assesses the value of mitigating erosive runoff events in a severely prone watershed of France using a discrete choice experiment approach. Good farming practices are integrated together with flood protection programs within a common management policy. The inclusion of risk exposure and socio-demographic variables in a random parameter logit model allows accounting for both latent and observed heterogeneity in preferences. Results show substantial benefits for each of the management alternatives valued. Results also identify that preferences significantly vary across respondents which suggests that policy makers should consider heterogeneity in preferences when designing policies for various area profiles in order to closely monitor welfare improvements