IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v140y2022ics1389934122000594.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic contributions of wildlife management areas in North Carolina

Author

Listed:
  • Casola, William R.
  • Peterson, M. Nils
  • Sills, Erin O.
  • Pacifici, Krishna
  • Moorman, Christopher E.

Abstract

Wildlife management areas (WMAs) provide a wide range of ecosystem services. Among these services, hunting and fishing often make the most obvious contribution to local and state economies through the expenditures of the hunters and anglers. However, the total economic contributions of WMAs also include other forms of recreation that are generally less visible, unlicensed, and less well understood. Quantifying the size of the economic contribution from all recreationists can inform decisions about investment in and management of public lands. To this end, we estimated the direct, indirect, and induced economic contributions of recreation on protected land managed by the state of North Carolina (NC) primarily for hunting, fishing, and wildlife conservation (hereafter WMAs). We collected data on visitation and conducted in-person intercept surveys at 9 WMAs to estimate the number of visits and expenditures per visit for people engaged in activities that required licenses (e.g., hunting) and activities that did not (e.g., hiking and bird watching). We estimated annual visitation on the 9 study WMAs, accounting for differences in location, hunting season, day of the week, and weather. We then predicted annual visitation at all 94 WMAs in NC using a predictive regression model. Most visitors did not engage in any licensed activities, and those visitors spent more per trip on average ($119.83) and had greater variability in expenses than visitors engaged in licensed activities ($84.19). We used the estimates of total annual visits, expenditures per visit, and the distribution of those expenditures across sectors to calculate the economic contribution of recreation on each of the 9 study WMAs and on the entire WMA system in NC. Recreation was responsible for approximately 2200 jobs, $84 million USD in annual labor income, and $140 million USD in value added annually in NC. The majority of this contribution was due to visits made by users not engage in licensed uses of WMAs, as those users were more numerous, spent more per trip, and were more likely to visit WMAs in peri-urban areas with more economic linkages than rural areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Casola, William R. & Peterson, M. Nils & Sills, Erin O. & Pacifici, Krishna & Moorman, Christopher E., 2022. "Economic contributions of wildlife management areas in North Carolina," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:140:y:2022:i:c:s1389934122000594
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102747
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934122000594
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102747?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Seth B. Payton & John R. Ottensmann, 2015. "The implicit price of urban public parks and greenways: a spatial-contextual approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(3), pages 495-512, March.
    2. Liu, Xiangping & Taylor, Laura O. & Hamilton, Timothy L. & Grigelis, Peter E., 2013. "Amenity values of proximity to National Wildlife Refuges: An analysis of urban residential property values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 37-43.
    3. Stephan J Goetz & Mark D Partridge & Heather M Stephens, 2018. "The Economic Status of Rural America in the President Trump Era and beyond," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 97-118.
    4. Elena G. Irwin & Nancy E. Bockstael, 2001. "The Problem of Identifying Land Use Spillovers: Measuring the Effects of Open Space on Residential Property Values," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(3), pages 698-704.
    5. Kalyan Chakraborty & John Keith, 2000. "Estimating the Recreation Demand and Economic Value of Mountain Biking in Moab, Utah: An Application of Count Data Models," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 461-469.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Gore, Madison & Joshi, Omkar & Chapagain, Binod & Poudyal, Neelam C. & York, Betsey, 2023. "An analysis of economic benefits from wildlife management areas in Oklahoma," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    2. Casola, William R. & Peterson, M. Nils & Pacifici, Krishna & Sills, Erin O. & Moorman, Christopher E., 2023. "Conservation motivations and willingness to pay for wildlife management areas among recreational user groups," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    3. Gore, Madison & Joshi, Omkar & Chapagain, Binod & Poudyal, Neelam C. & Fairbanks, Sue, 2023. "Visitor satisfaction with WMAs: A case study from Oklahoma," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Denise L. Stanley, 2005. "Local Perception of Public Goods: Recent Assessments of Willingness‐to‐pay for Endangered Species," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(2), pages 165-179, April.
    2. Dhakal, Bhubaneswor & Yao, Richard T. & Turner, James A. & Barnard, Tim, 2012. "Recreational users' willingness to pay and preferences for changes in planted forest features," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 34-44.
    3. Jay Mittal, 2017. "Valuing Visual Accessibility of Scenic Landscapes in a Single Family Housing Market: A Spatial Hedonic Approach," ERES eres2017_1, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
    4. John A. Curtis, 2002. "Estimating the Demand for Salmon Angling in Ireland," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 33(3), pages 319-332.
    5. Dominic Moran & Esmond Tresidder & Alistair McVittie, 2006. "Estimating the Recreational Value of Mountain Biking Sites in Scotland Using Count Data Models," Tourism Economics, , vol. 12(1), pages 123-135, March.
    6. Deena A. Isom & Hunter M. Boehme & Toniqua C. Mikell & Stephen Chicoine & Marion Renner, 2021. "Status Threat, Social Concerns, and Conservative Media: A Look at White America and the Alt-Right," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, July.
    7. Benjamin Wirth & Andreas Mense, 2014. "Flat Prices, Cell Phone Base Stations, and Network Structure," ERSA conference papers ersa14p1552, European Regional Science Association.
    8. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Poudyal, Neelam C. & Roberts, Roland K., 2008. "Spatial analysis of the amenity value of green open space," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 403-416, June.
    9. Stephan J. Goetz & Meri Davlasheridze & Yicheol Han & David A. Fleming-Muñoz, 2019. "Explaining the 2016 Vote for President Trump across U.S. Counties," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(4), pages 703-722, December.
    10. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Kim, Seung Gyu & Roberts, Roland K. & Jung, Suhyun, 2009. "Amenity values of spatial configurations of forest landscapes over space and time in the Southern Appalachian Highlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2646-2657, August.
    11. Partridge, Mark D. & Tsvetkova, Alexandra, 2018. "Local ability to "rewire" and socioeconomic performance: Evidence from US counties before and after the Great Recession," MPRA Paper 89313, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Abbott, Joshua K. & Klaiber, H. Allen, 2011. "The Value Of Water As An Urban Club Good: A Matching Approach To Hoa-Provided Lakes," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103781, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Jay Mittal & Sweta Byahut, 2019. "Scenic landscapes, visual accessibility and premium values in a single family housing market: A spatial hedonic approach," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 46(1), pages 66-83, January.
    14. Isabel Mendes & Isabel Proença, 2005. "Estimating the Recreation Value of Ecosystems by Using a Travel Cost Method Approach," Working Papers Department of Economics 2005/08, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    15. Paul Besseling & Jos Ebregt & Rafael Saitua & Ioulia Ossokina, 2005. "Multifunctional land use in the Amsterdam South Axis area - a cost-benefit analysis," ERSA conference papers ersa05p409, European Regional Science Association.
    16. Lynch, Lori & Duke, Joshua M., 2007. "Economic Benefits of Farmland Preservation: Evidence from the United States," Working Papers 7342, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    17. Stephen Hynes & Brian Cahill & Emma J. Dillon, 2007. "A Negative Binomial Discrete Choice Model of Forestry Recreation in Ireland," Working Papers 0709, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    18. Guillaume POUYANNE & Frederic GASCHET, 2013. "The Effect Of Current And Future Land Use On House Prices," ERSA conference papers ersa13p249, European Regional Science Association.
    19. Richard J. Vyn, 2012. "Examining for Evidence of the Leapfrog Effect in the Context of Strict Agricultural Zoning," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(3), pages 457-477.
    20. Elena G. Irwin, 2010. "New Directions For Urban Economic Models Of Land Use Change: Incorporating Spatial Dynamics And Heterogeneity," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 65-91, February.

    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:eee:forpol:v:140:y:2022:i:c:s1389934122000594. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.