The value of climate amenities: A comparison of hedonic and discrete choice approaches

Amenities that vary across cities are typically valued using either a hedonic model, in which amenities are capitalized into wages and housing prices, or a discrete model of household location choice. In this paper, we use the 2000 Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) to value climate amenities using both methods. We compare estimates of marginal willingness to pay (MWTP), allowing preferences for climate amenities to vary by location. We find that mean MWTP for warmer winters is about twice as large using the discrete choice approach as with the hedonic approach; mean MWTP for cooler summers is approximately the same. The two approaches differ, however, in their estimates of MWTP by location. These disparities lead to significant differences in estimates of willingness to pay to avoid the A2 and B1 SRES scenarios in 2020-2050 using the two approaches.

Automated summary

This paper values climate amenities using the 2000 Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) through comparison of hedonic and discrete choice methods. It finds that the mean marginal willingness to pay (MWTP) for warmer winters is double when using the discrete choice approach compared to the hedonic approach, while the MWTP for cooler summers remains approximately the same. The two methods also differ in their estimates of MWTP by location, leading to significant variations in estimates of willingness to pay for different climate scenarios in the future.