IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/canjec/v54y2021i4p1684-1715.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The economic benefits of recreation in Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Lloyd‐Smith

Abstract

Canadians spend approximately 2.2% of the country's gross domestic product on outdoor recreation, but we do not yet know the economic benefits people receive from participating in these activities. I provide the first ever comprehensive assessment of the economic benefits of outdoor recreation in Canada. I use a nationally representative survey of recreational behaviour on over 24,000 Canadians to estimate a Kuhn–Tucker demand model that accounts for substitution between activities and satiation in demand. The results demonstrate that participation in outdoor recreation provides Canadians with $98 billion in annual economic benefits, which is well over twice as large as reported expenditures. I also reveal substantial heterogeneity in recreation benefits across activities and regions in Canada. Bénéfices économiques des loisirs récréatifs au Canada. Les dépenses des Canadiens en matière de loisirs récréatifs de plein air représentent environ 2,2 % du produit intérieur brut du pays; néanmoins, les avantages économiques pour ceux qui les pratiquent restent ignorés. Dans cet article, je propose la toute première évaluation globale des bénéfices économiques liés à la pratique de loisirs récréatifs de plein air au Canada. Les données d’une enquête représentative à l’échelle nationale relative aux habitudes récréatives de plus de 24 000 Canadiens me permettent d’estimer un modèle de demande de type Kuhn‐Tucker tenant compte à la fois des possibilités de substitution entre les activités et de la satisfaction de la demande. Les résultats montrent que pour les Canadiens, les bénéfices économiques liés à la pratique d’activités récréatives de plein air s’élèvent à 98 milliards de dollars par an, soit bien plus du double des dépenses déclarées. En outre, je montre qu’en matière d’avantages liés aux loisirs récréatifs, il existe une hétérogénéité substantielle d’une activité et d’une région à une autre.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Lloyd‐Smith, 2021. "The economic benefits of recreation in Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(4), pages 1684-1715, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:canjec:v:54:y:2021:i:4:p:1684-1715
    DOI: 10.1111/caje.12560
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12560
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/caje.12560?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. George R. Parsons, 1991. "A Note on Choice of Residential Location in Travel Cost Demand Models," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(3), pages 360-364.
    2. Nancy Olewiler, 2017. "Canadas dependence on natural capital wealth: Was Innis wrong?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(4), pages 927-964, November.
    3. Margaret Forsyth, 2000. "On estimating the option value of preserving a wilderness area," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 413-434, May.
    4. Hunt Allcott & Luca Braghieri & Sarah Eichmeyer & Matthew Gentzkow, 2020. "The Welfare Effects of Social Media," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(3), pages 629-676, March.
    5. Ian Bateman & Amii Harwood & David Abson & Barnaby Andrews & Andrew Crowe & Steve Dugdale & Carlo Fezzi & Jo Foden & David Hadley & Roy Haines-Young & Mark Hulme & Andreas Kontoleon & Paul Munday & Un, 2014. "Economic Analysis for the UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Synthesis and Scenario Valuation of Changes in Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(2), pages 273-297, February.
    6. Erik Brynjolfsson & Avinash Collis & Felix Eggers, 2019. "Using massive online choice experiments to measure changes in well-being," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(15), pages 7250-7255, April.
    7. Schenker, Nathaniel & Taylor, Jeremy M. G., 1996. "Partially parametric techniques for multiple imputation," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 425-446, August.
    8. Fezzi, Carlo & Bateman, Ian J. & Ferrini, Silvia, 2014. "Using revealed preferences to estimate the Value of Travel Time to recreation sites," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 58-70.
    9. Bhat, Chandra R., 2008. "The multiple discrete-continuous extreme value (MDCEV) model: Role of utility function parameters, identification considerations, and model extensions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 274-303, March.
    10. Diane Dupont, 2003. "CVM Embedding Effects When There Are Active, Potentially Active and Passive Users of Environmental Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(3), pages 319-341, July.
    11. Alan Randall, 1994. "Difficulty with the Travel Cost Method," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(1), pages 88-96.
    12. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Swait, Joffre & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1996. "A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 243-253, September.
    13. Patrick Lloyd-Smith & Joshua K. Abbott & Wiktor Adamowicz & Daniel Willard, 2019. "Decoupling the Value of Leisure Time from Labor Market Returns in Travel Cost Models," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(2), pages 215-242.
    14. Hailu, Getu & Boxall, Peter C. & McFarlane, Bonita L., 2005. "The influence of place attachment on recreation demand," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 581-598, August.
    15. Daniel F. Heitjan & Roderick J. A. Little, 1991. "Multiple Imputation for the Fatal Accident Reporting System," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 40(1), pages 13-29, March.
    16. Hess, Stephane & Train, Kenneth E. & Polak, John W., 2006. "On the use of a Modified Latin Hypercube Sampling (MLHS) method in the estimation of a Mixed Logit Model for vehicle choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 147-163, February.
    17. Nancy Olewiler, 2017. "Canada’s dependence on natural capital wealth: Was Innis wrong?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(4), pages 927-964, November.
    18. Kimberly Rollins & Diana Dumitras & Anita Castledine, 2008. "An Analysis of Congestion Effects Across and Within Multiple Recreation Activities," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(1), pages 95-116, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Randriamaro, Mary Tiana & Cook, Joseph, 2022. "The value of time, with and without a smartphone," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 138-146.
    2. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Marek Giergiczny & Jakub Kronenberg & Jeffrey Englin, 2019. "The Individual Travel Cost Method with Consumer-Specific Values of Travel Time Savings," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 961-984, November.
    3. Guy Aridor, 2022. "Market Definition in the Attention Economy: An Experimental Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 10190, CESifo.
    4. Faulques, Martin & Bonnet, Jean & Bourdin, Sébastien & Juge, Marine & Pigeon, Jonas & Richard, Charlotte, 2022. "Generational effect and territorial distributive justice, the two main drivers for willingness to pay for renewable energies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    5. Jara-Díaz, Sergio & Rosales-Salas, Jorge, 2017. "Beyond transport time: A review of time use modeling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 209-230.
    6. Melstrom, Richard & Lupi, Frank, 2012. "Using a Control Function to Resolve the Travel Cost Endogeneity Problem in Recreation Demand Models," MPRA Paper 48036, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised May 2013.
    7. Kuriyama, Koichi & Shoji, Yasushi & Tsuge, Takahiro, 2020. "The value of leisure time of weekends and long holidays: The multiple discrete–continuous extreme value (MDCEV) choice model with triple constraints," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    8. Brynjolfsson, Erik & Collis, Avinash & Diewert, W. Erwin & Eggers, Felix & Fox, Kevin J., 2019. "GDP-B: Accounting for the Value of New and Free Goods in the Digital Economy," OSF Preprints sptfu, Center for Open Science.
    9. Chaton, Corinne & Gouraud, Alexandre, 2020. "Simulation of fuel poverty in France," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    10. Hailu, Getu & Boxall, Peter C. & McFarlane, Bonita L., 2005. "The influence of place attachment on recreation demand," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 581-598, August.
    11. Abildtrup, Jens & Garcia, Serge & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Stenger, Anne, 2013. "Spatial preference heterogeneity in forest recreation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 67-77.
    12. Joffre Swait & Cristiano Franceschinis & Mara Thiene, 2020. "Antecedent Volition and Spatial Effects: Can Multiple Goal Pursuit Mitigate Distance Decay?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(2), pages 243-270, February.
    13. Roberto Mosquera & Mofioluwasademi Odunowo & Trent McNamara & Xiongfei Guo & Ragan Petrie, 2020. "The economic effects of Facebook," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(2), pages 575-602, June.
    14. Baker, Rick & Ruting, Brad, 2014. "Environmental Policy Analysis: A Guide to Non‑Market Valuation," 2014 Conference (58th), February 4-7, 2014, Port Macquarie, Australia 165810, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    15. Lana Salih Joelsson & Evangelia Elenis & Kjell Wanggren & Anna Berglund & Anastasia N Iliadou & Carolyn E Cesta & Sunni L Mumford & Richard White & Tanja Tydén & Alkistis Skalkidou, 2019. "Investigating the effect of lifestyle risk factors upon number of aspirated and mature oocytes in in vitro fertilization cycles: Interaction with antral follicle count," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-15, August.
    16. James Macaskill & Patrick Lloyd‐Smith, 2022. "Six decades of environmental resource valuation in Canada: A synthesis of the literature," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 70(1), pages 73-89, March.
    17. Oliver Loertscher & Pau S. Pujolas, 2023. "Canadian Productivity Growth: Stuck in the Oil Sands," Department of Economics Working Papers 2023-01, McMaster University.
    18. Xie, Lusi & Adamowicz, Wiktor & Lloyd-Smith, Patrick, 2023. "Spatial and temporal responses to incentives: An application to wildlife disease management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    19. Voltaire, Louinord & Koutchade, Obafèmi Philippe, 2020. "Public acceptance of and heterogeneity in behavioral beach trip responses to offshore wind farm development in Catalonia (Spain)," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    20. Halkos, George, 2012. "The use of contingent valuation in assessing marine and coastal ecosystems’ water quality: A review," MPRA Paper 42183, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:wly:canjec:v:54:y:2021:i:4:p:1684-1715. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5982 .

    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.