IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/toueco/v23y2017i5p1114-1123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What is the value of world heritage status for a German national park? A choice experiment from Jasmund, 1 year after inscription

Author

Listed:
  • David Wuepper

    (Technical University Munich, Germany)

Abstract

There is an ongoing debate about whether World Heritage (WH) status has a significant tourism value. However, Su and Lin and Wuepper and Patry argue that the better question is which sites benefit and suggest a general pattern. In both studies, it is argued that in addition to broad regional trends, more remote and less famous destinations benefit most. We test this statement with a choice experiment at a small, remote, national park in northeast Germany. We find a per-person increase in willingness to pay of €4.70 which translates into an overall value increase of €3.8 million annually. Additionally, 9% of the visitors report they only know of the park because of the media coverage of its WH inscription and 15% report to have been convinced about the park’s quality by its WH status.

Suggested Citation

  • David Wuepper, 2017. "What is the value of world heritage status for a German national park? A choice experiment from Jasmund, 1 year after inscription," Tourism Economics, , vol. 23(5), pages 1114-1123, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:toueco:v:23:y:2017:i:5:p:1114-1123
    DOI: 10.1177/1354816616655958
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1354816616655958
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1354816616655958?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roberto Patuelli & Maurizio Mussoni & Guido Candela, 2016. "The Effects of World Heritage Sites on Domestic Tourism: A Spatial Interaction Model for Italy," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Roberto Patuelli & Giuseppe Arbia (ed.), Spatial Econometric Interaction Modelling, chapter 0, pages 281-315, Springer.
    2. Jimura, Takamitsu, 2011. "The impact of world heritage site designation on local communities – A case study of Ogimachi, Shirakawa-mura, Japan," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 288-296.
    3. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Vic Adamowicz, 1998. "Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 413-428, April.
    4. Tiziana Cuccia, 2012. "Is it worth being inscribed in the world heritage list? A case study of �The Baroque cities in Val di Noto� (Sicily)," RIEDS - Rivista Italiana di Economia, Demografia e Statistica - The Italian Journal of Economic, Demographic and Statistical Studies, SIEDS Societa' Italiana di Economia Demografia e Statistica, vol. 66(2), pages 169-190.
    5. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    6. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Johan Lagerkvist, Carl, 2005. "Using cheap talk as a test of validity in choice experiments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 147-152, November.
    7. Yang, Chih-Hai & Lin, Hui-Lin & Han, Chia-Chun, 2010. "Analysis of international tourist arrivals in China: The role of World Heritage Sites," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 827-837.
    8. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    9. Denzil G. Fiebig & Michael P. Keane & Jordan Louviere & Nada Wasi, 2010. "The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 393-421, 05-06.
    10. Su, Yu-Wen & Lin, Hui-Lin, 2014. "Analysis of international tourist arrivals worldwide: The role of world heritage sites," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 46-58.
    11. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    12. Burc Kayahan & Brian Vanblarcom, 2012. "Cost Benefit Analysis of UNESCO World Heritage Site Designation in Nova Scotia," Review of Economic Analysis, Digital Initiatives at the University of Waterloo Library, vol. 4(2), pages 247-273, December.
    13. Kenneth E. Train, 1998. "Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences over People," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 230-239.
    14. David Wuepper & Marc Patry, 2017. "The World Heritage list: Which sites promote the brand? A big data spatial econometrics approach," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 41(1), pages 1-21, February.
    15. Huang, Chia-Hui & Tsaur, Jen-Ruey & Yang, Chih-Hai, 2012. "Does world heritage list really induce more tourists? Evidence from Macau," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1450-1457.
    16. Riccardo Scarpa & Timothy J. Gilbride & Danny Campbell & David A. Hensher, 2009. "Modelling attribute non-attendance in choice experiments for rural landscape valuation," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 36(2), pages 151-174, June.
    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. Bacsi Zsuzsanna & Tóth Éva, 2019. "Word Heritage Sites as soft tourism destinations – their impacts on international arrivals and tourism receipts," Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, Sciendo, vol. 45(45), pages 25-44, September.
    2. Chanyul Park & Hwasung Song, 2018. "Visitors’ Perceived Place Value and the Willingness to Pay in an Urban Lake Park," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, November.
    3. Hwasung Song & Miseong Kim & Chanyul Park, 2020. "Temporal Distribution as a Solution for Over-Tourism in Night Tourism: The Case of Suwon Hwaseong in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-14, March.
    4. David Boto-García & Petr Mariel & José Baños Pino & Antonio Alvarez, 2022. "Tourists’ willingness to pay for holiday trip characteristics: A Discrete Choice Experiment," Tourism Economics, , vol. 28(2), pages 349-370, March.
    5. Renato Perez Loyola & Erda Wang & Nannan Kang, 2021. "Economic valuation of recreational attributes using a choice experiment approach: An application to the Galapagos Islands," Tourism Economics, , vol. 27(1), pages 86-104, February.
    6. Nannan Kang & Erda Wang & Yang Yu, 2019. "Valuing forest park attributes by giving consideration to the tourist satisfaction," Tourism Economics, , vol. 25(5), pages 711-733, August.

    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. Yang, Yang & Xue, Lan & Jones, Thomas E., 2019. "Tourism-enhancing effect of World Heritage Sites: Panacea or placebo? A meta-analysis," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 29-41.
    2. Elina Simone & Rosaria Rita Canale & Amedeo Maio, 2019. "Do UNESCO World Heritage Sites Influence International Tourist Arrivals? Evidence from Italian Provincial Data," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 146(1), pages 345-359, November.
    3. Jones, Thomas E. & Yang, Yang & Yamamoto, Kiyotatsu, 2017. "Assessing the recreational value of world heritage site inscription: A longitudinal travel cost analysis of Mount Fuji climbers," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 67-78.
    4. Yu-Xia Lin & Ming-Hsiang Chen & Bi-Shu Lin & Shu-Yin Tseng & Ching-Hui (Joan) Su, 2021. "Nonlinear impact of World Heritage Sites on China’s tourism expansion," Tourism Economics, , vol. 27(4), pages 795-819, June.
    5. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2013. "Dynamic hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments: Evidence from measuring the impact of corporate social responsibility on consumers demand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 53-61.
    6. Corneliu Iațu & Bogdan-Constantin Ibănescu & Oana Mihaela Stoleriu & Alina Munteanu, 2018. "The WHS Designation—A Factor of Sustainable Tourism Growth for Romanian Rural Areas?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-12, February.
    7. Gao, Yanyan & Su, Wei, 2019. "Is the World Heritage just a title for tourism?," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Canale, Rosaria Rita & De Simone, Elina & Di Maio, Amedeo & Parenti, Benedetta, 2019. "UNESCO World Heritage sites and tourism attractiveness: The case of Italian provinces," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 114-120.
    9. Chiadmi, Ines & Traoré, Sidnoma Abdoul Aziz & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2020. "Asian tiger mosquito far from home: Assessing the impact of invasive mosquitoes on the French Mediterranean littoral," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    10. De Ayala Bilbao, Amaya & Hoyos Ramos, David & Mariel Chladkova, Petr, 2012. "Landscape valuation through discrete choice experiments: Current practice and future research reflections," BILTOKI 1134-8984, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística).
    11. Shr, Yau-Huo & Ready, Richard C. & Orland, Brian & Echols, Stuart, 2017. "Do Visual Representations Influence Survey Responses? Evidence from a Choice Experiment on Landscape Attributes of Green Infrastructure," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258397, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    13. Schaak, H. & Musshoff, O., 2018. "Are public preferences for pasture landscapes heterogeneous? Results of a discrete choice experiment in Germany," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277213, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren B. Olsen, 2017. "Can a Repeated Opt-Out Reminder remove hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments? An application to consumer valuation of novel food products," IFRO Working Paper 2017/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    15. Wuepper, David & Clemm, Alexandra & Wree, Philipp, 2019. "The preference for sustainable coffee and a new approach for dealing with hypothetical bias," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 475-486.
    16. Alcon, Francisco & Marín-Miñano, Cristina & Zabala, José A. & de-Miguel, María-Dolores & Martínez-Paz, José M., 2020. "Valuing diversification benefits through intercropping in Mediterranean agroecosystems: A choice experiment approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    17. Juutinen, Artti & Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ovaskainen, Ville, 2014. "Estimating the benefits of recreation-oriented management in state-owned commercial forests in Finland: A choice experiment," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 396-412.
    18. Schaak, Henning & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2018. "Public preferences for pasture landscapes and the role of scale heterogeneity," FORLand Working Papers 04 (2018), Humboldt University Berlin, DFG Research Unit 2569 FORLand "Agricultural Land Markets – Efficiency and Regulation".
    19. Stanislava Pachrová & Eva Janoušková & Jitka Ryšková, 2018. "Disparities in Tourism Demand of UNESCO Destinations," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 20(S12), pages 1040-1040, November.
    20. Namhee Kim & Miju Kim & Sangkwon Lee & Chi-Ok Oh, 2023. "Comparing Stakeholders’ Economic Values for the Institution of Payments for Ecosystem Services in Protected Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, July.

    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:sae:toueco:v:23:y:2017:i:5:p:1114-1123. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.