IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jagaec/v25y1993i02p36-45_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Conjoint Analysis of Waterfowl Hunting in Louisiana

Author

Listed:
  • Gan, Christopher
  • Luzar, E. Jane

Abstract

Conjoint analysis, widely used in marketing research, offers an alternative resource valuation approach suited to outdoor recreation activities characterized as multiattribute. Design, implementation, and interpretation of conjoint analysis are reviewed in the context of recreation applications. Conjoint analysis is used in an analysis of waterfowl hunting in Louisiana. Using primary data collected from a survey of waterfowl hunters, ordered logit is used to estimate willingness-to-pay for recreation experience attributes.

Suggested Citation

  • Gan, Christopher & Luzar, E. Jane, 1993. "A Conjoint Analysis of Waterfowl Hunting in Louisiana," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 36-45, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:25:y:1993:i:02:p:36-45_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1074070800018940/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mingie, James C. & Poudyal, Neelam C. & Bowker, J.M. & Mengak, Michael T. & Siry, Jacek P., 2017. "Big game hunter preferences for hunting club attributes: A choice experiment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 98-106.
    2. Rodolfo Bernabéu & Margarita Brugarolas & Laura Martínez-Carrasco & Roberto Nieto-Villegas & Adrián Rabadán, 2023. "The Price of Organic Foods as a Limiting Factor of the European Green Deal: The Case of Tomatoes in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-15, February.
    3. Francis Oremo & Richard Mulwa & Nicholas Oguge, 2021. "Sustainable water access and willingness of smallholder irrigators to pay for on-farm water storage systems in Tsavo sub-catchment, Kenya," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 1371-1391, February.
    4. Christian Garavaglia & Paolo Mariani, 2017. "How Much Do Consumers Value Protected Designation of Origin Certifications? Estimates of willingness to Pay for PDO Dry‐Cured Ham in Italy," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(3), pages 403-423, June.
    5. Jeffrey Gillespie & Gary Taylor & Alvin Schupp & Ferdinand Wirth, 1998. "Opinions of professional buyers toward a new, alternative red meat: Ostrich," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 247-256.
    6. Harrison, R. Wes & Gillespie, Jeffrey & Fields, Deacue, 2005. "Analysis of Cardinal and Ordinal Assumptions in Conjoint Analysis," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(2), pages 238-252, October.
    7. Haefele, Michelle A. & Loomis, John B., 1999. "A Comparison Of Conjoint Ratings And Rankings: An Application For Passive Use Values Of Forest Health," 1999 Annual Meeting, July 11-14, 1999, Fargo, ND 35729, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    8. Häggmark-Svensson, Tobias & Elofsson, Katarina & Engelmann, Marc & Gren, Ing-Marie, 2015. "A review of the literature on benefits, costs, and policies for wildlife management," Working Paper Series 2015:1, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department Economics.
    9. F. Reed Johnson & Melissa Ruby Banzhaf & William H. Desvousges, 2000. "Willingness to pay for improved respiratory and cardiovascular health: a multiple‐format, stated‐preference approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(4), pages 295-317, June.
    10. Garavaglia, Christian & Mariani, Paolo, 2015. "How Much Do Consumers Value PDO Certifications? Estimates of WTP for PDO Dry-Cured Ham in Italy," 145th Seminar, April 14-15, 2015, Parma, Italy 200376, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Sánchez, M. & Gil, José M., 1998. "Comparación de tres métodos de estimación del análisis conjunto: diferencias en las preferencias en el consumo de vino y en la segmentación del mercado," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 10, pages 131-146, Diciembre.
    12. Johnson, F. Reed & Desvousges, William H., 1997. "Estimating Stated Preferences with Rated-Pair Data: Environmental, Health, and Employment Effects of Energy Programs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 79-99, September.
    13. Stevens, T. H. & Belkner, R. & Dennis, D. & Kittredge, D. & Willis, C., 2000. "Comparison of contingent valuation and conjoint analysis in ecosystem management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 63-74, January.
    14. Carol A. Jones & Katherine A. Pease, 1997. "Restoration‐Based Compensation Measures In Natural Resource Liability Statutes," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 15(4), pages 111-122, October.
    15. Buller, Virginia & Hudson, Darren & Parkhurst, Gregory M. & Whittington, Andrew, 2006. "The Impact of Hunting Package Attributes on Hunting Package Prices in Mississippi," Research Reports 15798, Mississippi State University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    16. Harrison, R. Wes & Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Fields, Deacue, 2001. "Theoretical And Empirical Considerations Of Eliciting Preferences And Model Estimation In Conjoint Analysis," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20680, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:25:y:1993:i:02:p:36-45_01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aae .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.