670 likes | 734 Views
Noise valuation: Results. Alistair Hunt and Alberto Longo University of Bath EC HEATCO project meeting 19 January 2006, Las Palmas. Descriptive Statistics - Survey size. Descriptive Statistics – Characteristics of the Road samples. Descriptive stats - Road (1).
E N D
Noise valuation: Results Alistair Hunt and Alberto Longo University of Bath EC HEATCO project meeting 19 January 2006, Las Palmas
Descriptive Statistics – Characteristics of the Road samples
Road “No” votes Protesters in orange
Econometric model Mean WTP is thus , where E(WTP) is mean WTP. WTP* denotes WTP for the entire sample, while WTP denotes WTP for those persons in the sample who hold positive values for the program. Positive data are analyzed as an interval data model assuming a Weibull distribution of the error terms
Road Analysis: Conclusions • High number of respondents with WTP=0 • High number of protesters in the UK (50%) and Norway (54.7%) • WTP depends • on annoyance levels in Sweden • on high levels of annoyance in the UK and Hungary on annoyance (but not different levels of annoyance) in Norway • Germany is not WTP for annoyance reduction • Mixed results for Urban Vs Rural: • WTP for Urban is less than for Rural in UK, Sweden, Hungary. • Pooled results conforms with economic theory
Rail Analysis: Conclusions • High number of WTP=0 • Rail noise WTP < Road noise WTP, except for Germany • High number of protesters: UK 45%, Norway 56%, Hungary 38%, Germany 42%, Spain 35% • WTP depends • on annoyance levels in Germany • on high levels of annoyance in Norway • WTP does not depend on levels of annoyance in the UK, Hungary, Spain • Mixed results for Urban Vs Rural: • WTP for Urban is less than for Rural in Spain • WTP for Urban is more than for Rural in Germany • Pooled data confirm that WTP does not depend on annoyance levels