1 / 18

Partial Identification of Hedonic Demand Functions

Partial Identification of Hedonic Demand Functions. Congwen Zhang (Virginia Tech) Nicolai Kuminoff (Arizona State University) Kevin Boyle (Virginia Tech) 10/23/2011. Endogeneity problem with hedonic demand estimation.

reya
Download Presentation

Partial Identification of Hedonic Demand Functions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Partial Identification of Hedonic Demand Functions Congwen Zhang (Virginia Tech) Nicolai Kuminoff (Arizona State University) Kevin Boyle (Virginia Tech) 10/23/2011

  2. Endogeneity problem with hedonic demand estimation • Endogeneity arises because people choose prices and quantities/qualities simultaneously. • Example: we are interested in X, an environmental good. Hedonic price function: (non-linear in X ) Implicit price of X: ( is function of X ) Choice of X no based on an exogenous price. • Why worry? Most policies result in nonmarginal changes in X.

  3. “Imperfect” Instrumental Variables (Nevo & Rosen, 2010) • X: endogenous variable; Z: instrumental variable (IV) “perfect” IV: and “imperfect” IV : We allow correlation between IV and error (unobserved components of preferences! Z is “perfect”: Z is “imperfect”: is bounded by and

  4. 1-SIDED AND 2-SIDED BOUNDS Proposition (Nevo & Rosen, 2010): Suppose both and Case 1: If , then Case 2: If , then

  5. “Imperfect” IVs in demand estimation • Potential “imperfect” IVs: IV1. market indicator (M) IV2. interaction between M and income (M*INC) • Why “imperfect” ? 1. sorting across markets 2. uncertainty about the spatial extent of a market • Correlation Direction: cov(X, U)>0, cov(M, U)>0, cov(M, X)>0 cov(X, U)>0, cov(M*INC, U)>0, cov(M*INC, X)>0 both IVs give us one-sided bound !

  6. Partial Identification of Marshallian Consumer Surplus (MCS) • Bounds on βBounds on MCS • Suppose we obtain a 2-sided bound: MCSl (slope = ) MCS2 (slope = )

  7. Partial Identification of MCS (slope = ) (slope = )

  8. Partial Identification of MCS • Suppose we obtain a 1-sided bound: S (slope = ) (slope = )

  9. An Empirical Demonstration • Water quality in markets for lakefront properties. • Data description: (1) House transactions: from multiple markets in VT, ME, and NH. (2) Water clarity data: associated w/ each house. (3) Demographic data: associated w/ each home owner. • Important features: (1) Each state includes data from multiple markets. (2) The spatial extent of a market is difficult to determine with certainty.

  10. Two-Stage Hedonic Model • 1st stage: Estimate hedonic price function (market-specific) implicit price of water clarity: • 2nd Stage: Estimate demand function parameters (pooled)

  11. Table . Demand Estimation with Pooled Data • Boyle et al. (1999)’s point estimates fall into our bounds !

  12. Conclusions and future research • Partial identification provides a more credible way to estimate demand and welfare. • Provides approach to uncertainty analysis. How big can the injuries or benefits be? • One-side bounds not always helpful. • Partial identification logic can be a robustness check on point estimates. • Implicit prices are plausible.

  13. Preferences for Stormwater Control in Residential Developments Jessica Boatright Kurt Stephenson Kevin J. Boyle Sara Nienow Virginia Tech 11/1/2011

  14. Application • Subdivision infrastructure that affects stormwater runoff. • Hanover County, Virginia • Residential home sales between 1995-1996 • Mean sales price = $148,950

  15. Variables • CUL = 1 if cul-de-sac and 0 otherwise • CURBGUTTER = 1 if curb-and-gutters and 0 otherwise • STW20 = 1 if street width 20 feet or less and 0 otherwise • STW25 = 1 if street width 20 to 30 ft and 0 otherwise • street width greater than 30 ft is omitted category

  16. Results

  17. Implications • Cul-de-sacs and curb and gutters channel and rapidly transport stormwater, which can exacerbate nonpoint-source pollution of surface waters. • Narrower streets mean less impervious surface, which can reduce some of the residential stormwater effects, but the benefits to home owners are less that being on a cul-de-sac or having a curb and gutter on their street.

More Related