Modelagem de preferência em R: um teste sobre a disposição de pagar dos compradores de casas
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23925/2179-3565.2021v12i2p154-173Palavras-chave:
Home Buyer Preferences, Discrete Choice Experiments, Sustainable HousingResumo
Modelling stated preferences is an almost mystical science and as there is no data explaining how the sustainable feature in homes would effectively encourage homebuyers to invest in sustainable housing, it is important to investigate the buyers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for sustainable housing. The study of stated preferences often requires the use of specialised software or proprietary programs, which can be difficult and/or expensive to use. This study proposes to re-purpose the ‘support.CEs’ package, a program written in the R programming language, from its agronomic roots to measure home buyer preferences for sustainable housing. These are demonstrated through a stated preference discrete choice experiment of choosing model houses with differing levels of energy savings, renewable energy generation, landscaping, soundproofing, ventilation, and price differences. A pilot study was performed using an online survey, constructed using the LMA design tool provided in the ‘support.CEs’ package. The survey was also separated into six blocks of six questions each to reduce the cognitive burden on respondents. The survey was distributed through social media channels. Preliminary results with a limited sample of 20 respondents with mixed income, age, and occupational demographics, analysed using the package’s clogit function, that performs conditional logit estimations, have shown that the results have a statistically reliable adjusted rho-squared value and that all coefficients show the expected signs. From this study, it can be concluded that the ‘support.CEs’ package can be used to model home buyer preferences and that adequate blocking allows for the measurement of a higher number of variables despite having smaller sample sizes.
Referências
AHMAD, S.; KADIR, M. Z. A. A.; SHAFIE, S. Current perspective of the renewable energy development in Malaysia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2011 15(2), 897-904. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.11.009
AIZAKI, H. Basic Functions for Supporting an Implementation of Choice Experiments in R. 2012, 50(Code Snippet 2), 24. doi:10.18637/jss.v050.c02
AIZAKI, H.; NAKATANI, T.; SATO, K. Stated Preference Methods Using R (1st ed. 2014). New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
AIZAKI, H.; NANSEKI, T.; ZHOU, H. Japanese consumer preferences for milk certified as good agricultural practice. Animal Science Journal, 2013 84(1), 82-89. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-0929.2012.01043.x
AIZAKI, H.; SATO, N. Consumers' Valuation of Good Agricultural Practice by Using Contingent Valuation and Contingent Ranking Methods: A Case Study of Miyagi Prefecture, Japan. Agricultural Information Research, 2007 16(3), 150-157. doi:10.3173/air.16.150
AL SURF, M. S. Challenges facing the application of sustainability to housing in Saudi Arabia. (PhD QUT Thesis (PhD)), Queensland University of Technology, Queensland, 2014.
ALDOSSARY, N. A.; REZGUI, Y.; KWAN, A. Public perception of sustainable, low energy homes in a subsidized developing country: Saudi Arabia as case study. Paper presented at the The 2016 International Academic Research Conference, 2016, London.
ALQAHTANY, A. People’s perceptions of sustainable housing in developing countries: the case of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Housing, Care and Support, 2020 23(3/4), 93-109. doi:10.1108/HCS-05-2020-0008
AMARCHINTA, H. K.; GRANDHI, R. V. Multi-Attribute Structural Optimization Based on Conjoint Analysis. AIAA Journal, 2008 46(4), 884-893. doi:10.2514/1.30530
BAK, A.; BARTLOMOWICZ, T. Conjoint analysis method and its implementation in conjoint R package. In J. Pociecha & R. Decker (Eds.), Data analysis methods and its applications, (Pociecha J., Decker R. (Eds.) ed., 2012 pp. 239-248). Bielefeld University, Germany: Bielefeld University, Germany.
BALABAN, O.; PUPPIM DE OLIVEIRA, J. A. Sustainable buildings for healthier cities: assessing the co-benefits of green buildings in Japan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017 163, S68-S78. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.086
BEHBOOD, K. T.; TALEGHANI, M.; HEIDARI, S. Energy efficient architectural design strategies in hot-dry area of Iran: Kashan. Emirates Journal for Engineering Research, 2010 15(2), 85-91.
BORGHI, C. Discrete choice models for marketing: New methodologies for optional features and bundles. (Master Master thesis), Mathematisch Instituut, Universiteit Leiden, Leiden 2009. Retrieved from https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/binaries/content/assets/science/mi/scripties/borghimaster.pdf
BOXALL, P. C.; ADAMOWICZ, W. L.; SWAIT, J.; WILLIAMS, M.; LOUVIERE, J. A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation. Ecological Economics, 1996 18(3), 243-253. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(96)00039-0
BROWNSTONE, D.; BUNCH, D. S.; TRAIN, K. Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 2000 34(5), 315-338. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-2615 (99)00031-4
BURTON, M.; RIGBY, D. The Self Selection of Complexity in Choice Experiments. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2012 94(3), 786-800. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aas015
CALFEE, J.; WINSTON, C.; STEMPSKI, R. Econometric Issues in Estimating Consumer Preferences from Stated Preference Data: A Case Study of the Value of Automobile Travel Time. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 2001 83(4), 699-707. doi:10.1162/003465301753237777
CARSON, R. T.; HANEMANN, W. M. Chapter 17 Contingent Valuation. In K.-G. Mler & J. R. Vincent (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Economics 2005 Vol. 2, pp. 821-936. Elsevier.
CERVERO, R. ; KANG, C. D. Bus rapid transit impacts on land uses and land values in Seoul, Korea. Transport Policy, 2011 18(1), 102-116. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.06.005
CHAU, C. K.; TSE, M. S.; CHUNG, K. Y. A choice experiment to estimate the effect of green experience on preferences and willingness-to-pay for green building attributes. Building and Environment, 2010 45(11), 2553-2561. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.05.017
CHAU, C. K.; YUNG, H. K.; LEUNG, T. M.; LAW, M. Y. Evaluation of relative importance of environmental issues associated with a residential estate in Hong Kong. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2006 77(1), 67-79. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.01.006
D’AGOSTINO, D.; ZACÀ, I.; BAGLIVO, C.; CONGEDO, P. M. Economic and Thermal Evaluation of Different Uses of an Existing Structure in a Warm Climate. Energies, 2017 10(5), 658.
DAHLBLOM, M. Towards sustainability with building services systems:–by focusing on material choices, energy use and thermal indoor climates in residential buildings. Tor, 2020 Uppsala University, Sweden.
DANAHER, P. J. Using conjoint analysis to determine the relative importance of service attributes measured in customer satisfaction surveys. Journal of Retailing, 1997 73(2), 235-260. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(97)90005-1
DARKO, A.; CHAN, A. P. C. Review of Barriers to Green Building Adoption. Sustainable Development, 2017 25(3), 167-179. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1651
DAVILA, O. G.; KOUNDOURI, P.; SOULIOTIS, I.; KOTRONI, E.; CHEN, W.; HAGGETT, C.; RUDOLPH, D. Supporting BLUE Growth: Eliciting Stakeholders' preferences for Multiple-Use Offshore Platforms. DEOS Working Papers, 2015. Athens University of Economics and Business.
FILER, J. E.; DELORIT, J. D.; HOISINGTON, A. J.; SCHULDT, S. J. Optimizing the Environmental and Economic Sustainability of Remote Community Infrastructure. Sustainability, 2020 12(6), 2208.
FONT-I-FURNOLS, M.; GUERRERO, L. Consumer preference, behavior and perception about meat and meat products: An overview. Meat Science, 2014 98(3), 361-371. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.06.025
FORMAN, E. H.; GASS, S. I. The Analytic Hierarchy Process—An Exposition. Operations Research, 2001 49(4), 469-486. doi:10.1287/opre.49.4.469.11231
GALSTER, G. William Grigsby and the Analysis of Housing Sub-markets and Filtering. Urban Studies, 1996 33(10), 1797-1805. doi:10.1080/0042098966376
GBI. Assessment Criteria for Residential New Construction RNC (2014). Avaliable in: https://www.greenbuildingindex.org/Files/Resources/GBI%20Tools/RNC%20Reference%20Guide%20V3.1.pdf
GILL, D. A.; SCHUHMANN, P. W.; Oxenford, H. A. Recreational diver preferences for reef fish attributes: Economic implications of future change. Ecological Economics, 2015 111, 48-57. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.01.004
GLUMAC, B.; WISSINK T. P. Homebuyers’ preferences concerning installed photovoltaic systems: A discrete choice experiment. Journal of European Real Estate Research, 2018 11(1), 102-124. doi:10.1108/JERER-12-2016-0044
GREEN, P. E.; SRINIVASAN, V. Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook. Journal of Consumer Research, 1978 5(2), 103-123. doi:10.1086/208721
HALL, J.; VINEY, R.; HAAS, M.; LOUVIERE, J. Using stated preference discrete choice modeling to evaluate health care programs. Journal of Business Research, 2004 57(9), 1026-1032. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00352-1
HAN, X. Housing demand in Shanghai: A discrete choice approach. China Economic Review, 2010 21(2),
-376. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2010.02.006
HARDI, P.; ZDAN, T.; SMITH, G. Assessing sustainable development: principles in practice. In G. Smith (Ed.), (Smith, G. (Ed.). ed 1999.).
HEINZLE, S. L.; BOEY Y. Y.; A.; LOW Y. X. M. The Influence of Green Building Certification Schemes on Real Estate Investor Behaviour: Evidence from Singapore. Urban Studies, 2013 50(10), 1970-1987. doi:10.1177/0042098013477693
HENSHER, D. A. Identifying the Influence of Stated Choice Design Dimensionality on Willingness to Pay for Travel Time Savings. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 2004 38(3), 425-446.
HOEFMAN, R.; AL-JANABI, H.; MCCAFFREY, N.; CURROW, D.; RATCLIFFE, J. Measuring caregiver outcomes in palliative care: a construct validation study of two instruments for use in economic evaluations. Quality of Life Research, 2015 24(5), 1255-1273. doi:10.1007/s11136-014-0848-8
HOLMES, T. P.; ADAMOWICZ, W. L.Attribute-Based Methods. In P. A. Champ, K. J. Boyle, & T. C. Brown (Eds.), A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation (2003 pp. 171-219). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
HOSMER JR. D. W.; LEMESHOW, S.; STURDIVANT, R. X. Applied Logistic Regression (r. Edition Ed.). NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2013 Hoboken.
HU, H.; GEERTMAN, S; HOOIMEIJER, P. The willingness to pay for green apartments: The case of Nanjing, China. Urban Studies, 2014 51(16), 3459-3478. doi:10.1177/0042098013516686
HUANG, H.; YIN, L. Creating sustainable urban built environments: An application of hedonic house price models in Wuhan, China. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 2015 30(2), 219-235. doi:10.1007/s10901-014-9403-8
HUONG, N. V.; SOEBARTO, V. Gaps in Understanding Sustainable Housing: Case study in Adelaide and Hanoi. Architectural Science Review, 2003 46(4), 369-374. doi:10.1080/00038628.2003.9697008
IJZERMAN, M. J.; VAN TIL, J. A.; BRIDGES, J. F. P. A Comparison of Analytic Hierarchy Process and Conjoint Analysis Methods in Assessing Treatment Alternatives for Stroke Rehabilitation. The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2012 5(1), 45-56. doi:10.2165/11587140-000000000-00
IRONS, B.; HEPBURN, C. Regret Theory and the Tyranny of Choice*. Economic Record, 2007 83(261), 191-203. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4932.2007.00393.x
ISA, M.; RAHMAN, M. M. G. M. A.; SIPAN, I.; HWA, T. K. Factors Affecting Green Office Building Investment in Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2013 105, 138-148. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.015
IYENGAR, S. S.; LEPPER, M. R. When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2000 79(6), 995-1006. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.995
JOHAR, F.; RAZAK, M. R. The Right Attitude to Sustain the Green Neighbourhoods. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2015 202, 135-143. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.216
JOHNSON, F. R. ; DESVOUSGES, W. H. Estimating Stated Preferences with Rated-Pair Data: Environmental, Health, and Employment Effects of Energy Programs. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1997 34(1), 79-99. doi:https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1997.1002
JUDGE, M.; WARREN-MYERS, G.; PALADINO, A. Using the theory of planned behaviour to predict intentions to purchase sustainable housing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019 215, 259-267. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.029
KALLAS, Z; GÓMEZ-LIMÓN, J. A.; HURLÉ, J. B. Decomposing the Value of Agricultural Multifunctionality: Combining Contingent Valuation and the Analytical Hierarchy Process. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2007 58(2), 218-241. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2007.00085.x
KAUKO, T. What makes a location attractive for the housing consumer? Preliminary findings from metropolitan Helsinki and Randstad Holland using the analytical hierarchy process. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 2006 21(2), 159-176. doi:10.1007/s10901-006-9040-y
KHAN, R. A. J.; THAHEEM, M. J.; ALI, T. H. Are Pakistani homebuyers ready to adopt sustainable housing? An insight into their willingness to pay. Energy Policy, 2020 143, 111598. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111598
KIBERT, C. J. Green buildings: an overview of progress. Journal of Land Use & Environmental Law (Proceedings of the 10th anniversary public interest environmental conference: ‘shaping Florida’s future: a decade of protecting an eternity), 2004 19(2), 502.
KLUMBYTE, E.; BLIUDZIUS, R.; FOIKADES, P. A SIPOC based model for the sustainable management of facilities in social housing. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2020 410, 012081. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/410/1/012081
KONG, F.; YIN, H.; NAKAGOSHI, N.Using GIS and landscape metrics in the hedonic price modeling of the amenity value of urban green space: A case study in Jinan City, China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2007 79(3), 240-252. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.02.013
KWAK, S.-Y.; YOO, S.-H.; KWAK, S.-J. Valuing energy-saving measures in residential buildings: A
choice experiment study. Energy Policy, 2010 38(1), 673-677. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.09.022
LIU, J.; BENGTSSON, B.; BOHMAN, H.; STAFFANSSON PAULI, K. A System Model and An Innovation Approach toward Sustainable Housing Renovation. Sustainability, 2020 12(3), 1130.
LIU, Y.; HONG, Z.; ZHU, J.; YAN, J.; QI, J; LIU, P. Promoting green residential buildings: Residents' environmental attitude, subjective knowledge, and social trust matter. Energy Policy, 2018 112, 152-161. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.020
LOUVIERE, J. J.; FLYNN, T. N.; CARSON, R. T. Discrete Choice Experiments Are Not Conjoint Analysis. Journal of Choice Modelling, 2010 3(3), 57-72. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1755-5345 (13)70014-9
MA, C.; POLYAKOV, M.; PANDIT, R. Solar Capitalization in Western Australian Property Market. School of Agricultural and Resource Economics. University of Western Australia. Australia, 2015. Retrieved from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uwauwp/199230.html
MALIENE, V.; MALYS, N.. High-quality housing—A key issue in delivering sustainable communities. Building and Environment, 2009 44(2), 426-430. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.04.004
MANGHAM, L. J. ; HANSON, K. ; MCPAKE, B. How to do (or not to do). Designing a discrete choice experiment for application in a low-income country. Health Policy and Planning, 2008 24(2), 151-158. doi:10.1093/heapol/czn047
MARMOLEJO‐DUARTE, C.; RUIZ‐LINEROS, M. Using choice‐based‐experiments to support real estate design decisions. Journal of European Real Estate Research, 2013 6(1), 63-89. doi:10.1108/17539261311312979
MAWAD, F.; TRÍAS, M.; GIMÉNEZ, A.; MAICHE, A; ARES, G. Influence of cognitive style on information processing and selection of yogurt labels: Insights from an eye-tracking study. Food Research International, 2015 74, 1-9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2015.04.023
MCFADDEN, D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. New York: Academic Press, 1974.
MEDINECKIENĖ, M., TURSKIS, Z., & ZAVADSKAS, E. K. Sustainable construction taking into account the building impact on the environment. Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management, 2010 18(2), 118-127. doi:https://doi.org/10.3846/jeelm.2010.14
METSELAAR, E. E. Assessing the willingness to change: Construction and validation of the DINAMO. (PhD Thesis), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 1997.
MOSER, R.; RAFFAELLI, R. Does attribute cut-off elicitation affect choice consistency? Contrasting hypothetical and real-money choice experiments. Journal of Choice Modelling, 2014 11, 16-29. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2014.02.003
MULLINER, E.; MALIENE, V. Criteria for sustainable housing affordability. Journal of Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management, 2011 3, 966-973.
MUZAFFAR, N. Developing an extended model of Theory of Planned behaviour to explore green purchase behavior of Pakistani consumers. American Journal of Business and Management, 2015 4(2), 85–101. doi:https://doi.org/10.11634/216796061504654
NG, W. Assessing the Impact of Parking Pricing on Transportation Mode Choice and Behaviour. (PhD Doctor of Philosophy), University of California, Berkeley, USA. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/56f3v4wg Available from UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Electronic Theses and Dissertations database. 2014 (Ng_berkeley_0028E_14710)
NORWOOD, F. B. Less Choice is Better, Sometimes. Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, 2006 4(1). doi:doi:10.2202/1542-0485.1130
OERLEMANS, L. A. G.; CHAN, K.-Y.; VOLSCHENK, J. Willingness to pay for green electricity: A review of the contingent valuation literature and its sources of error. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2016 2016 66, 875-885. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.08.054
OGAWA, K.; HATTORI, S.; FUKUSHIMA, T. A Comparative Study of Data Gathering Procedures in Conjoint Measurement. グノーシス：法政大学産業情報センター紀要＝Γνωσις(2), 1993 18-33. doi:info:doi/10.15002/00020855
OKECHUKU, C. The Importance of Product Country of Origin: A Conjoint Analysis of the United States, Canada, Germany and The Netherlands. European Journal of Marketing, 1994 28(4), 5-19. doi:10.1108/03090569410061150
ORME, B. (2001). Which Conjoint Method Should I Use? Semantic Scholar 2001. Available in: https://business.nmsu.edu/~mhyman/M310_Articles/Which_CA_Method_to_Use.pdf
ORZECHOWSKI, M. A.; ARENTZE, T. A.; BORGERS, A. W. J.; TIMMERMANS, H. J. P. Alternate methods of conjoint analysis for estimating housing preference functions: Effects of presentation style. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 2005 20(4), 349-362. doi:10.1007/s10901-005-9019-0
OSLAND, L. An Application of Spatial Econometrics in Relation to Hedonic House Price Modeling. Journal of Real Estate Research, 2010 32(3), 289-320. doi:10.1080/10835547.2010.12091282
PARK, M.; HAGISHIMA, A.; TANIMOTO, J.; CHUN, C. Willingness to pay for improvements in environmental performance of residential buildings. Building and Environment, 2013 60, 225-233. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.10.017
POORTINGA, W.; STEG, L.; VLEK, C.; WIERSMA, G. Household preferences for energy-saving measures: A conjoint analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 2003 24(1), 49-64. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(02)00154-X
PULLEN, S.; MICHAEL, A; GEORGE, Z.; JIAN, Z.; NICHOLAS, C.; LOU, W. Developing an assessment framework for affordable and sustainable housing. Construction Economics and Building, 2010 10(1), 48-64. doi:https://doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v10i1-2.1587
QIN, H. T. Y.; IM, L. P.; ABDULLATEEF, O. Sustainability of affordable housing: A review of assessment tools. International Transaction Journal of Engineering, Management, & Applied Sciences & Technologies, 2020 11(8). doi:DOI: 10.14456/ITJEMAST.2020.157
REED, R.; MILLS, A. Identifying the drivers behind housing preferences of first‐time owners. Property Management, 2007 25(3), 225-241. doi:10.1108/02637470710753611
ROLFE, J.; BENNETT, J. The impact of offering two versus three alternatives in choice modelling experiments. Ecological Economics, 2009 68(4), 1140-1148. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.08.007
SAFRONOVA, N.; NEZHNIKOVA, E.; KOLHIDOV, A. Sustainable housing development in conditions of changing living environment. Paper presented at the MATECWeb of Conferences, 2017.
SAID, R.; DAUD, M. N.; ESHA, Z.; AB. MAJID, R; NAJIB, M. Owners’ Perception towards
Sustainable Housing Affordability in Kuching, Sarawak. Journal of Design and Built Environment, 2017 194-206%@ 2232-1500. doi:10.22452/jdbe.sp2017no1.16
SALAMA, A. Sustainability/Trans-Disciplinarity: A Concern for People and Environments between Confusing Terminology and Outdated Approaches, 2007. Retrieved from https://pureportal.strath.ac.uk/en/publications/sustainability-trans-disciplinarity-a-concern-for-people-and-envi
SCARPA, R.; WILLIS, K. Willingness-to-pay for renewable energy: Primary and discretionary choice of British households' for micro-generation technologies. Energy Economics, 2010 32(1), 129-136. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.06.004
SCHOLL, A.; MANTHEY, L.; HELM, R.; STEINER, M. Solving multiattribute design problems with analytic hierarchy process and conjoint analysis: An empirical comparison. European Journal of Operational Research, 2005 164(3), 760-777. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2004.01.026
SCHWARTZ, B.; WARD, A.; Monterosso, J.; Lyubomirsky, S.; White, K.; Lehman, D. R. Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2002 83(5), 1178-1197. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.5.1178
SILAYOI, P; SPEECE, M. The importance of packaging attributes: a conjoint analysis approach. European Journal of Marketing, 2007 41(11/12), 1495-1517. doi:10.1108/03090560710821279
SKEDGEL, C.; REGIER, D. A. Constant-Sum Paired Comparisons for Eliciting Stated Preferences: A Tutorial. The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2015 8(2), 155-163. doi:10.1007/s40271-014-0077-9
SOVACOOL, B. K.; DRUPADY, I. M. Examining the Small Renewable Energy Power (SREP) Program in Malaysia. Energy Policy, 2011 39(11), 7244-7256. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.08.045
STREET, D. J.; BURGESS, L.; LOUVIERE, J. J. Quick and easy choice sets: Constructing optimal and nearly optimal stated choice experiments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 2005 22(4), 459-470. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.09.003
SWAIT, J. Advanced Choice Models. In B. J. Kanninen (Ed.), Valuing Environmental Amenities Using Stated Choice Studies: A Common Sense Approach to Theory and Practice (Kanninen, Barbara J. (Ed.) 2007 ed., pp. 229-293). Netherlands, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht.
SYAHID, A.; TAREQ, M. A.; ZAKI, S. A. Sustainability or Bust: Malaysian Home Buyers’ Stated
Preferences for Sustainable Housing. Paper presented at the 2016 The 3rd International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Applications (ICIEA 2016).
TAN, T.-H. Meeting first-time buyers’ housing needs and preferences in greater Kuala Lumpur. Cities, 2012 29(6), 389-396. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2011.11.016
TAREQ, M. A.; SYAHID, A.; KHAN, O. S. M.; ZAKI, S. A. Housing Demand Factors and its Implications on Sustainable Housing in Asia: A Retrospective. SSRN, 2015. Available in: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3848780
VINEY, R.; SAVAGE, E; LOUVIERE, J. Empirical investigation of experimental design properties of discrete choice experiments in health care. Health Economics, 14(4), 2005 349-362. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.981
WANG, A. M. Measuring the benefits of urban green areas: A spatial hedonic approach. Paper presented at the The 10th Asian Real Estate Society (AsRES) International Conference, Sydney, Australia, 2005.
WANG, P.-K.; SHIH, S.-G.; PERNG, Y.-H. Competitive Advantage Evaluation Model of Sustainable Housing Design. Sustainability, 2020 12(15), 6020.
WINGATE, S. Public perception of sustainable interior design practices in residential settings. (Master Graduate Theses and Dissertations), Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 2014. Retrieved from https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/14257 (14257)
WINSTON, N. Regeneration for sustainable communities? Barriers to implementing sustainable housing in urban areas. Sustainable Development, 2010 18(6), 319-330. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.399
WINSTON, N.; PAREJA EASTAWAY, M. Sustainable Housing in the Urban Context: International Sustainable Development Indicator Sets and Housing. Social Indicators Research, 2008 87(2), 211-221. doi:10.1007/s11205-007-9165-8
YOKOI, T.; ISHIZUKA, H. Two-stage spatial hedonic model on newly built condominiums in the Tokyo housing market. Paper presented at the AsRES 19th International Conference, Asian Real Estate Society, Sydney, 2013.
YOSHIDA, J.; SUGIURA, A. The Effects of Multiple Green Factors on Condominium Prices. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 2015 50(3), 412-437. doi:10.1007/s11146-014-9462-3
ZAHEDI, F. The Analytic Hierarchy Process—A Survey of the Method and its Applications. INFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics, 1986 16(4), 96-108. doi:10.1287/inte.16.4.96
ZHANG, L.; SUN, C.; LIU, H.; ZHENG, S. The role of public information in increasing homebuyers' willingness-to-pay for green housing: Evidence from Beijing. Ecological Economics, 2016 129, 40-49. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.05.010
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Esta obra está licenciada sob uma licença Creative Commons Atribuição - No comercial - Sin derivaciones 4.0 Internacional
1.O(s) autor(es) autoriza(m) a publicação do artigo na revista;
2.O(s) autor(es) garante(m) que a contribuição é original e inédita e que não está em processo de avaliação em outra(s) revista(s);
3.A revista não se responsabiliza pelas opiniões, ideias e conceitos emitidos nos textos, por serem de inteira responsabilidade de seu(s) autor(es);
4.É reservado aos editores o direito de proceder ajustes textuais e de adequação do artigos às normas da publicação.
1.1 Copyright Statement
This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivers 4.0 International license.
1. The author (s) authorize the publication of the article in the journal;
2. The author (s) warrant that the contribution is original and unpublished and is not in the process of being evaluated in other journal (s);
3. The journal is not responsible for the opinions, ideas and concepts emitted in the texts, as they are the sole responsibility of its author (s);
4. The editors are entitled to make textual adjustments and to adapt the articles to the standards of publication.
