Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Valuing forest recreation on the national level in a transition economy: The case of Poland

Contents:

Author Info

  • Bartczak, Anna
  • Lindhjem, Henrik
  • Navrud, Ståle
  • Zandersen, Marianne
  • Zylicz, Tomasz

Abstract

Recreation benefits constitute a substantial part of the total economic value of forests, and are important for the choice of multi-functional forest policies. The application of methods valuing such benefits is in its infancy in transition economies in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), so value estimates for policy use are sometimes transferred from Western Europe proportionally scaled down by GDP. However, little is known about how recreation values vary with income, and one risks underestimating benefits in CEE. This paper reports the findings of the first comprehensive, national-level study in any CEE country estimating annual and per trip forest recreation values in Poland using the Travel Cost (TC) and Contingent Valuation (CV) methods. Two in-person interview surveys of forest recreation behaviour were carried out. The first was administered on-site in ten representative forest areas, and the other in the homes of a national sample of adult Poles. Results show that forest recreation is highly valued in Poland, at Euros 0.64-6.93 per trip per person, depending on the valuation method. Both trip frequency and per trip values are higher than the average in Western Europe, despite a lower income level. Thus, a simple GDP-adjusted transfer from Western Europe would substantially undervalue forest recreation in Poland. Further, a comparison of TC consumer surplus estimates and GDP/capita in Europe shows no clear relationship, indicating that a range of cultural, institutional and other factors may be important.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VT4-4SN968S-1/2/49b2a8165113387cb0e82d31da3ad69d
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Forest Policy and Economics.

Volume (Year): 10 (2008)
Issue (Month): 7-8 (October)
Pages: 467-472

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:10:y:2008:i:7-8:p:467-472

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Richard T. Carson & Nicholas E. Flores & Kerry M. Martin & Jennifer L. Wright, 1996. "Contingent Valuation and Revealed Preference Methodologies: Comparing the Estimates for Quasi-Public Goods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(1), pages 80-99.
  2. Grossman, Gene M & Krueger, Alan B, 1995. "Economic Growth and the Environment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 110(2), pages 353-77, May.
  3. Ready, Richard & Navrud, Stale, 2006. "International benefit transfer: Methods and validity tests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 429-434, December.
  4. Markowska, Agnieszka & Zylicz, Tomasz, 1999. "Costing an international public good: the case of the Baltic Sea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 301-316, August.
  5. Stina Hökby & Tore Söderqvist, 2003. "Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay for Environmental Services in Sweden," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(3), pages 361-383, November.
  6. Alan fnKrupnick & Kenneth fnHarrison & Eric fnNickell & Michael fnToman, 1996. "The value of health benefits from ambient air quality improvements in Central and Eastern Europe: An exercise in benefits transfer," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(4), pages 307-332, June.
  7. Scarpa, Riccardo & Chilton, Susan M. & Hutchinson, W. George & Buongiorno, Joseph, 2000. "Valuing the recreational benefits from the creation of nature reserves in Irish forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-250, May.
  8. Lindhjem, Henrik, 2007. "20 years of stated preference valuation of non-timber benefits from Fennoscandian forests: A meta-analysis," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 251-277, February.
  9. W. Douglass Shaw & Peter Feather, 1999. "Possibilities for Including the Opportunity Cost of Time in Recreation Demand Systems," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(4), pages 592-602.
  10. Cameron, Trudy Ann & Poe, Gregory L. & Ethier, Robert G. & Schulze, William D., 2002. "Alternative Non-market Value-Elicitation Methods: Are the Underlying Preferences the Same?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 391-425, November.
  11. Bengt Kristrom & Pere Riera, 1996. "Is the income elasticity of environmental improvements less than one?," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 45-55, January.
  12. Grogger, J T & Carson, Richard T, 1991. "Models for Truncated Counts," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 225-38, July-Sept.
  13. Bengt Kristr�m, 1997. "Spike Models in Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(3), pages 1013-1023.
  14. Willis, K G, 1991. "The Recreational Value of the Forestry Commission Estate in Great Britain: A Clawson-Snetsch Travel Cost Analysis," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 38(1), pages 58-75, February.
  15. Alan Randall, 1994. "Difficulty with the Travel Cost Method," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(1), pages 88-96.
  16. Parsons, George R. & Wilson, Aaron J., 1997. "Incidental And Joint Consumption In Recreation Demand," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 26(1), April.
  17. Carson, Richard T. & Hanemann, W. Michael, 2006. "Contingent Valuation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 17, pages 821-936 Elsevier.
  18. Cubbage, Frederick & Harou, Patrice & Sills, Erin, 2007. "Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 833-851, April.
  19. Marianne Zandersen & Mette Termansen & Frank Søndergaard Jensen, 2007. "Testing Benefits Transfer of Forest Recreation Values over a Twenty-Year Time Horizon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(3), pages 412-440.
  20. Croitoru, Lelia, 2007. "How much are Mediterranean forests worth?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(5), pages 536-545, January.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

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

Cited by:
  1. Czajkowski, Mikolaj & Buszko-Briggs, Malgorzata & Hanley, Nick, 2009. "Valuing changes in forest biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2910-2917, October.
  2. Czajkowski, Mikolaj & Hanley, Nicholas, 2008. "How to 'Sell' an Environmental Good: Using Labels to Investigate Scope Effects," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2008-16, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
  3. Chobotová, Veronika, 2013. "The role of market-based instruments for biodiversity conservation in Central and Eastern Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 41-50.
  4. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Anna Bartczak & Marek Giergiczny & Stale Navrud & Tomasz Żylicz, 2013. "Providing Preference-Based Support for Forest Ecosystem Service Management in Poland," Working Papers 2013-05, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
  5. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Bartczak, Anna & Giergiczny, Marek & Navrud, Stale & Żylicz, Tomasz, 2014. "Providing preference-based support for forest ecosystem service management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1-12.
  6. Anna Bartczak & Jeffrey Englin & Arwin Pang, 2012. "When are Forest Visits Valued the Most? An Analysis of the Seasonal Demand for Forest Recreation in Poland," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 52(2), pages 249-264, June.
  7. Isabel Mendes & Isabel Proença, 2009. "Measuring the Social Recreation Per-Day Net Benefit of Wildlife Amenities of a National Park: A Count-Data Travel Cost Approach," Working Papers Department of Economics 2009/35, ISEG - School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, University of Lisbon.
  8. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Using Labels to Investigate Scope Effects in Stated Preference Methods," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(4), pages 521-535, December.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:10:y:2008:i:7-8:p:467-472. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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