14,508 rated or chosen profiles from 403 respondents, in up to 12 tasks of 3 profiles varying on 5 attributes.

About this table

Description	Choice experiment: 403 urban and rural Malaysian households chose among two wetland-conservation programmes and a status-quo alternative described by environmental protection zones, biodiversity, recreation, flood protection and a household cost (reduced subsidies); 12 choice sets each. Level text is not in the deposit (codes only).
Reference	Hassan, S., Olsen, S. B., & Thorsen, B. J. (2019). Urban-rural divides in preferences for wetland conservation in Malaysia. Land Use Policy, 84, 226-237.
DOI	10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.015
Licence	CC BY 4.0
Source data	https://doi.org/10.17632/3yjzwt26b4.1

Notes

Conjoint table (irw_conjoint_2). Choice among conservation programmes A, B and a status quo (all attributes at level 1, flood level 3, price 0; a profile, no opt-out) described by environmental protection zones, biodiversity protection, recreational services, flood and a household cost framed as a subsidy reduction. LABELS: codes only: the deposit has no codebook, so attributes read 'level 1/2/3' and price is the stored number (currency and period unknown).

These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.

Size and shape

Respondents	403
Rows (one per respondent, task and profile)	14,508
Tasks per respondent (most)	12
Profiles per task	3
Attributes	5
Tasks with no profile chosen	0

Design

Topic	climate energy environment
A profile represents	policy
Country	MY
Language shown	unknown
Language of stored levels	en
Randomization restrictions	unknown
Task order	recorded in the deposit
Profile position	recorded in the deposit

Outcomes:

choice	Choice among wetland conservation alternatives 1, 2 and 3 (status quo) (paraphrase; exact wording not in the deposit) [choice, forced]

Columns

attr_biodiversityattr_environmental_protectionattr_floodattr_priceattr_recreationchoicecov_agecov_education_codecov_gender_codecov_urban_codeidprofiletask

The layout (one row per respondent, task and profile; choice/rating outcomes; attr_ columns holding each attribute level as displayed) is defined in the IRW conjoint standard. What the outcomes asked is under Design above.

Get the data

Download CSVno account needed Browse on Redivisexplore and query Croissant metadataHugging Face, Kaggle, OpenML

Or load it directly in R or Python (both need a free Redivis account; the first call opens a browser to sign in):

# R
install.packages("remotes")
remotes::install_github("itemresponsewarehouse/Rpkg")
library(irw)
df <- irw_fetch("hassan_2019_wetland_malaysia", source = "conj")

# Python
pip install irw

import irw
df = irw.fetch("hassan_2019_wetland_malaysia", source="conj")

How to cite

@article{Hassan_2019, title={Urban-rural divides in preferences for wetland conservation in Malaysia}, volume={84}, ISSN={0264-8377}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.015}, DOI={10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.015}, journal={Land Use Policy}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Hassan, Suziana and Olsen, Søren Bøye and Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark}, year={2019}, month=May, pages={226–237} }

Version and provenance

IRW version	v584
Redivis dataset	irw_conjoint_2 v1.4
Redivis dataset DOI	10.57761/hk97-wv30
Manifest pin for this IRW version	v1.4
Metadata source	irw_meta v44.0