Comparing water quality valuation across probability and non-probability samples / Kaitlynn Sandstrom.
This thesis compares the results of a stated preference survey administered to three samples: one non-probability sample and two non-probability samples. The probability sample is an address-based sample from the USPS postal delivery file, while the two non-probability samples are from the opt-in pa...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2022.
|
| Subjects: | |
| Genre: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Dissertation Note: |
Thesis M.S. Michigan State University. Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics 2022. |
| Physical Description: | 1 online resource (v, 59 pages) : illustrations |
| Format: | Thesis Electronic eBook |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000cam a22000007a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | in00006796104 | ||
| 006 | m o d | ||
| 007 | cr ||||||||||| | ||
| 008 | 230320s2022 xx a obm 000 0 eng d | ||
| 005 | 20230525111001.0 | ||
| 020 | |a 9798358489486 | ||
| 028 | 5 | 0 | |a 29999077 |b UMI |
| 028 | 5 | 0 | |a Sandstrom_grad.msu_0128N_19558 |b local |
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)on1373601515 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)1373601515 | ||
| 040 | |a EEM |b eng |e pn |c EEM |d EEM | ||
| 043 | |a n-us--- | ||
| 049 | |a QEMO |a EEMT | ||
| 099 | |a MSU ONLINE THESIS | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Sandstrom, Kaitlynn, |e author. | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparing water quality valuation across probability and non-probability samples / |c Kaitlynn Sandstrom. |
| 260 | |c 2022. | ||
| 300 | |a 1 online resource (v, 59 pages) : |b illustrations | ||
| 336 | |a text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a computer |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a online resource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 588 | 0 | |a Online resource; title from PDF title page (viewed on May 25, 2023 | |
| 500 | |a Electronic resource. | ||
| 502 | |g Thesis |b M.S. |c Michigan State University. Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics |d 2022. | ||
| 504 | |a Includes bibliographical references (pages 58-59). | ||
| 520 | |a This thesis compares the results of a stated preference survey administered to three samples: one non-probability sample and two non-probability samples. The probability sample is an address-based sample from the USPS postal delivery file, while the two non-probability samples are from the opt-in panels, MTurk and Qualtrics. The survey used a single binary referendum contingent valuation question with respondents voting on a water quality change at a cost to their household. To understand differences in economic values across samples, we compared results of logit models that relate the referendum vote to cost and each water quality index. Several tests reveal differences across samples. First, almost all parameters were significantly different across samples except for water clarity. Second, we compared marginal willingness to pay (MWTP). However, many of the MWTP estimates for individual water quality indices were not significantly different across the three sources. Third, we calculated total WTP (TWTP) for a range of non-marginal changes. The MTurk values were always significantly greater than the address sample at the 1% level, and the Qualtrics values were significantly greater than the address sample for changes up to about a 20% improvement. In summary, we find that the non-probability methods generate different valuation results than the probability-based sample, especially in terms of TWTP. | ||
| 650 | 0 | |a Environmental economics. | |
| 650 | 0 | |a Water quality |x Economic aspects. | |
| 650 | 0 | |a Water-supply |x Economic aspects |z United States. | |
| 655 | 0 | |a Electronic dissertations. | |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://ezproxy.msu.edu:2047/login?url=http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&res_dat=xri:pqm&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:29999077 |z Connect to online resource - MSU authorized users |t 0 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/doi:10.25335/4rng-9a54 |z Connect to online resource - All users |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&res_dat=xri:pqm&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:29999077 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/doi:10.25335/4rng-9a54 |
| 947 | |c in00006796104 | ||
| 994 | |a C0 |b EEM | ||
| 999 | f | f | |s 9417ae83-f4e8-487c-a01c-b620bece96fd |i 79608964-ede2-482d-865e-8a143219cba4 |t 0 |
| 952 | f | f | |p Non-Circulating |a Michigan State University-Library of Michigan |b Michigan State University |c MSU Online Resource |d MSU Online Resource |t 0 |e MSU ONLINE THESIS |h Library of Congress classification |i Electronic Resource |n 1 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |t 0 |u http://ezproxy.msu.edu:2047/login?url=http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&res_dat=xri:pqm&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:29999077 |y Connect to online resource - MSU authorized users |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |t 0 |u https://doi.org/doi:10.25335/4rng-9a54 |y Connect to online resource - All users |