This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

A Comparison Of Stated And Revealed Preference Methods For Fisheries Management

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Hicks, Robert L.

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In this paper, we compare revealed and stated preference methods for anglers' preferences for various fisheries management measures. Using random utility models of recreation demand, we compare the use of stated and revealed preference methodologies for analyzing fisheries management options. We compare parameter and welfare estimates from the two models.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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://purl.umn.edu/19853
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association) in its series 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA with number 19853.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2002
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea02:19853

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Email:
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).

Related research
Keywords: Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

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.:

  1. Kaoru, Yoshiaki, 1995. "Measuring marine recreation benefits of water quality improvements by the nested random utility model," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 119-136, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. McConnell, Kenneth E. & Strand, Ivar E. & Blake-Hedges, Lynne, 1995. "Random Utility Models of Recreational Fishing: Catching Fish Using a Poisson Process," Marine Resource Economics, Marine Resources Foundation, vol. 10(3). [Downloadable!]
  3. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. George R. Parsons & GAndrew J. Plantinga & GKevin J. Boyle, 2000. "Narrow Choice Sets in a Random Utility Model of Recreation Demand," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(1), pages 86-99. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Bockstael, N. E. & McConnell, K. E. & Strand, I. E., 1989. "A Random Utility Model for Sportfishing: Some Preliminary Results for Florida," Marine Resource Economics, Marine Resources Foundation, vol. 6(3). [Downloadable!]
  6. Greene, Gretchen & Moss, Charles B. & Spreen, Thomas H., 1997. "Demand For Recreational Fishing In Tampa Bay, Florida: A Random Utility Approach," Marine Resource Economics, Marine Resources Foundation, vol. 12(4). [Downloadable!]
  7. Hauber, A Brett & Parsons, George R, 2000. " The Effect of Nesting Structure Specification on Welfare Estimation in a Random Utility Model of Recreation Demand: An Application to the Demand for Recreational Fishing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, American Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 82(3), pages 501-14, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. George R. Parsons & A. Brett Hauber, 1998. "Spatial Boundaries and Choice Set Definition in a Random Utility Model of Recreation Demand," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(1), pages 32-48. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Adamowicz, Wiktor & Swait, Joffre & Boxall, Peter & Louviere, Jordan & Williams, Michael, 1997. "Perceptions versus Objective Measures of Environmental Quality in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Models of Environmental Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 65-84, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. M. Herrmann & S. Lee & C. Hamel & K. Criddle & H. Geier & J. Greenberg & C. Lewis, . "An economic assessment of the sport fisheries for halibut and chinook and coho salmon in Lower Cook Inlet," Working Papers 2000-14, Utah State University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
  11. George R. Parsons & Michael S. Needelman, 1992. "Site Aggregation in a Random Utility Model of Recreation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(4), pages 418-433. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You too can volunteer for RePEc, for example by encouraging others to register as authors.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-26.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.