Exploring Scale Effects of Best/Worst Rank Ordered Choice Data to Estimate Benefits of Tourism in Alpine Grazing Commons

In many environmental valuation applications standard sample sizes for choice modelling surveys are impractical to achieve. One can improve data quality using more in-depth surveys administered to fewer respondents. We report on a study using high quality rank-ordered data elicited with the best-worst approach. The resulting "exploded logit" choice model, estimated on 64 responses per person, was used to study the willingness to pay for external benefits by visitors for policies which maintain the cultural heritage of alpine grazing commons. We find evidence supporting this approach and reasonable estimates of mean WTP, which appear theoretically valid and policy informative. © The Author (2011).

Levels and patterns of material deprivation in Ireland: After the 'Celtic tiger'

In this article we use the first full wave of the Irish component of the EU Statistics on Income and Living Conditions survey to evaluate conflicting interpretations of levels and patterns of material deprivation in Ireland after the 'Celtic Tiger'. Radical critics of Irish economic policies have seen the Irish case as a particularly good illustration of the tendency for globalization to be accompanied by widespread economic vulnerability and marginalization. Here, employing a multidimensional perspective we identify one fifth of the population as being economically vulnerable and one in 14 as vulnerable to maximal deprivation, in that they exhibit high risks of deprivation across a range of life-style deprivation dimensions. Current levels and depth of material deprivation are a good deal more modest than suggested by radical critics of the Irish experience of economic globalization.

Accounts of debates in the House of Commons, March– April 1731, supplementary to the diary of the first earl of Egmont

John Perceval (1685–1748), 1st Viscount Perceval and (from 1733) 1st Earl of Egmont, was an assiduous recorder of his own life and times. His diaries, published by the Historical Manuscripts Commission from manuscripts in the British Library, are the best source for parliamentary debates at Westminster in the 1730s. For the years 1730-1733, when Perceval sat in the Commons (as an Irish peer) they are remarkably full. His practice seems to have been to prepare two versions (presumably on the basis of notes taken in the House), the first attributing speeches to individuals, and the second, entered up in the diary, which listed speakers and summarized all arguments on each side. His letterbooks for 1731 contain accounts of five debates that embody his first editing process, with speeches attributed to individuals. They were sent to an Irish correspondent, Marmaduke Coghill, and largely omitted from the diary because Perceval had already transcribed them elsewhere. They are new to historians and cast light on two main issues: the unsuccessful attempts by Perceval and the ‘Irish lobby’ to persuade the British parliament to settle the Irish woollen trade, a question bedevilling Anglo-Irish relations in this period; and an attempt by the opposition to stir up anger against perceived Spanish aggression against Gibraltar. One of the most interesting features is the insight afforded into the Commons performances of Sir Robert Walpole: his management of debates, his own style of speaking, and his sharp exchanges with opponents like William Pulteney.