IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rseexx/v41y2017i2p45-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Discrete Choice Analysis to Determine Beachgoer Preferences for Beach Management: A South African Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • D.E. Lee
  • M. du Preez

Abstract

Beaches are areas of high economic value derived largely from high demand for recreational goods and services. These outdoor recreational resources are likely to succumb to considerable health pressures and trade-offs in the allocation of scarce local government level funding. An area of coastline where the recreational experience is being compromised due to high levels of tourist demand is the Nelson Mandela Bay area, South Africa. The primary objective of this paper is to inform policy makers on key public preferences regarding the use of beaches in Nelson Mandela Bay that can be used as inputs to the complex coastal resource allocation process. The application of a choice experiment, based on the concept of random utility theory, revealed that the presence of dogs on beaches and the level of public safety are very important predictors of public choice and should receive immediate attention as far as beach management is concerned.

Suggested Citation

  • D.E. Lee & M. du Preez, 2017. "Using Discrete Choice Analysis to Determine Beachgoer Preferences for Beach Management: A South African Case Study," Studies in Economics and Econometrics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 45-68, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rseexx:v:41:y:2017:i:2:p:45-68
    DOI: 10.1080/10800379.2017.12097312
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10800379.2017.12097312
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10800379.2017.12097312?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.

    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:taf:rseexx:v:41:y:2017:i:2:p:45-68. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rsee .

    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.