The empirical valuation of travel time savings is a derivative of the ratio of parameter estimates in a discrete choice model. The most common formulation (multinomial logit) imposes strong restrictions on the profile of the unobserved influences on choice as represented by the random component of a preference function. As we progress our ability to relax these restrictions we open up opportunities to benchmark the values derived from simple (albeit relatively restrictive) models. In this paper the author contrasts the values of travel time savings derived from multinomial logit and alternative specifications of mixed (or random parameter) logit models. The empirical setting is urban car commuting in six locations in New Zealand. The evidence suggests that less restrictive choice model specifications tend to produce higher estimates of values of time savings compared to the multinomial logit model; however the degree of under-estimation of multinomial logit remains quite variable, depending on the context. (Author/publisher)
Abstract