Trabajo fin de grado Título Nombre Apellido

1. Trabajo fin de grado Título Nombre Apellido

2. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Ínidice 1) Objetivo 2) Revisión de la literatura 3) Datos 4) Resultados 5) Conclusiones 2

3. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Objetivo del estudio Building of new wind turbines is not universally accepted action. The objective of the survey was to analyse the preferences of German citizens regarding wind power generation. Página 3

4. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Revisión de la literatura – modelos híbridos Hybrid model combining discrete and continuous heterogeneity representations of tastes has been applied e.g in Bujosa et al. (2010) (Bujosa, A., Riera, A. and Hicks, R. ,2010, Combining Discrete and Continuous Representations of Preference Heterogeneity: A Latent Class Approach, Environmental and Resource Economics) Hess et al. (2011) combines continuous MXL with LC model using two classes for each coefficient, where one value is constrained to zero but the value in the second class is allowed to vary across respondents using a continuous distribution. (Hess, Stathopoulus, Campbell, O’Neill, Caussade, 2011, It’s not that I don’t car, I just don’t care very much: confounding between attribute non-attendance and taste heterogeneity) (Boeri M., D. Campbell, A. Longo, 2012, Discrete mixture of sets of continuous distributions: a mixed finite-continuous approach)

5. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Revisión de la literatura – modelos híbridos Fosgerau and Hess (2009) analyse various ways of specifying random taste heterogeneity in DCM: base distribution with Legendre polynomials and discrete mixture of multiple continuous distributions. The performance of two parameter distributions is poor in comparison to FB or MOD. (Fosgerau and Hess, 2009, A comparison of methods for representing random taste heterogeneity in discrete choice models) Campbell et al. (2010) compare different combinations of discrete and continuous mixing approaches to uncover the unobserved heterogeneity in price sensitivities. They show that single continuous distribution may not adequately represent the true distribution. (Campbell, Doherty, Hynes, van Rensburg, 2010, Combining discrete and continuous mixing approaches to accommodate heterogeneity in price sensitivities in environmental choice analysis.) Página 5

6. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Revisión de la literatura – que aportamos Hess and Hensher (2010) have proposed inferring attribute-processing strategies through the analysis of respondent-specific coefficient distributions obtained through conditioning on observed choices. (Hess, S. & Hensher, D.A., 2010: Using conditioning on observed choices to retrieve individual-specific attribute processing strategies, Transportation Research Part B) We propose a heuristic approach based on mean values of the conditional distributions, which should be valid indicators of the coefficient sign, nevertheless . . . . . . it is important to recognise that it is impossible to retrieve the actual processing strategy used by a given respondent with certainty and we can only state that a respondent has positive or negative coefficient up to a probability. Página 6

7. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Datos: descripción del lugar Localización del parque El Espino Página 7

8. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Datos: La encuesta The survey: 353 interviews, 5 choice cards per respondent (Meyerhoff et al. 2010). Percentages of stated choice-card non-attendance The use of information on stated choice-task non-attendance can lead to endogeneity bias, given the likely correlation between the answers to non-attendance questions and other unobserved components. (Hess, 2011: Impact of unimportant attributes in stated choice surveys) (Beck , Rose, and Hensher, 2011: Consistently inconsistent: the role of certainty, acceptability and scale in automobile choice) Página 8

9. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Datos: Subgrupos Histograms of choice probabilities of 20% of individuals not included in the reduced sample Frequency of choice probabilities higher than 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9 for three different subsamples

10. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Modelo RPL Página 10

11. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Distribución de los coeficientes Sin no-atención Con no-atención Con atributos controversiales Página 11

12. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Atributos separados Table 9 Percentages of individuals with positive and negative coefficients Controversial attributes may lead to the existence of two clearly distinct groups of respondents: one experiencing positive and the other negative impacts of these attributes on their utilities, while maintaining rather homogeneous preferences inside these groups. Página 12

13. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Atributos separados: RPL RPL Full attendance RPL Stated non-attendance RPL Inferred non-attendance

14. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones La heterogeneidad reducida Unobserved preference heterogeneity is reduced

15. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Disposiciones a pagar WTP for Min and Height attributes

16. 1) Objetivo2) Revisión de la literatura3) Datos4) Resultados5) Conclusiones Conclusiones • Respondents state that they have not attended to certain attributes when they have actually taken them into account. • 2) Controversial attributes lead to difficulties in calculation of WTP measures because their coefficients are distributed around zero. • 3) Latent class allowing for continuous taste heterogeneity within classes (second approach) leads to similar results obtained by the method based on respondent-specific coefficient distributions (first approach). • 4) The treatment of controversial attributes with the two presented approaches leads to expected reduction of the unobserved preference heterogeneity.

17. Muchas gracias por su atención nombre.apellido@ikasle.ehu.es