IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uqseee/48976.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Birds - Their importance to visitors to an Australian Rainforest

Author

Listed:
  • Tisdell, Clement A.
  • Wilson, Clevo

Abstract

Lamington National Park in Queensland, Australia is noted for its rainforest and is part of Australia’s fourteen World Heritage listed properties but no systematic study has been done of the importance of birds to its visitors. This study rectifies this situation. It is based on data from survey forms handed to visitors at an important site in this park and completed by visitors following their visit. This yielded 622 useable replies. These enabled us to establish the comparative importance of birds as an attraction to this site. Furthermore, logit regression is used to analyze and to identify factors that increase the likelihood of a visitor saying that birds are an important attraction. In addition, the relative importance to visitors of various attributes of birds at this site is established. These attributes include hearing birds, diversity of birds, seeing lots of birds, presence of rare birds, presence of brightly colored birds and physical contact with birds. Logit regression analysis is used to isolate independent variables that increase or decrease the likelihood that visitors find diversity of birds, brightly colored birds or physical contact with birds at this site to be important. For example, factors such as the level of education of visitors, their gender, knowledge of birds and conservation attitudes are statistically significant influences.

Suggested Citation

  • Tisdell, Clement A. & Wilson, Clevo, 2004. "Birds - Their importance to visitors to an Australian Rainforest," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48976, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:uqseee:48976
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.48976
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/48976/files/WP95.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.48976?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. Kristin M. Jakobsson & Andrew K. Dragun, 1996. "Contingent Valuation and Endangered Species," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1120.
    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. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
    2. 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.
    3. Tisdell, Clement A., 2012. "Ecotourism Experiences Promoting Conservation and Changing Economic Values: The Case of Mon Repos Turtles," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 125209, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    4. Wiser, Ryan H., 2007. "Using contingent valuation to explore willingness to pay for renewable energy: A comparison of collective and voluntary payment vehicles," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 419-432, May.
    5. Kristin Jakobsson & Andrew Dragun, 2001. "The Worth of a Possum: Valuing Species with the Contingent Valuation Method," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(3), pages 211-227, July.
    6. Isabel Mendes, 2003. "Pricing Recreation use of National Parks for an efficient Nature Conservation and Application to the Portuguese case," Working Papers Department of Economics 2003/08, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    7. Boya Wang & Zhicheng Liu & Yuting Mei & Wenjie Li, 2019. "Assessment of Ecosystem Service Quality and Its Correlation with Landscape Patterns in Haidian District, Beijing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-34, April.
    8. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clem, 2004. "The net benefit of saving the Asian elephant: a policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 93-107, January.
    9. Tisdell, Clement A. & Wilson, Clevo, 2003. "The Public's Knowledge of and Support for Conservation of Australia's Tree-Kangaroos," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48955, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    10. K. G. Willis & P. L. Mcmahon & G. D. Garrod & N. A. Powe, 2002. "Water Companies' Service Performance and Environmental Trade-offs," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(3), pages 363-379.
    11. Marjainé, Szerényi Zsuzsanna, 2001. "A természeti erőforrások pénzbeli értékelése [Monetary valuation of natural resources]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 114-129.
    12. Peter Howley & Stephen Hynes & Cathal O’Donoghue, 2009. "Countryside Preferences: Exploring individuals’ WTP for the protection of traditional rural landscapes," Working Papers 0906, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    13. Branden B. Johnson & Adam M. Finkel, 2023. "Sensitivity to scope in estimating the social benefits of prolonging lives for regulatory decisions using national stated preference tradeoffs," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 509-528, September.
    14. Jette Jacobsen & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Are There Income Effects on Global Willingness to Pay for Biodiversity Conservation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 137-160, June.
    15. Tisdell, Clement A., 2003. "Influences of Knowledge of Wildlife Species on Patterns of Willingness to pay for their Conservation," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48972, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    16. Wan-Yu Liu & Yen-Yu Lin & Han-Shen Chen & Chi-Ming Hsieh, 2019. "Assessing the Amenity Value of Forest Ecosystem Services: Perspectives from the Use of Sustainable Green Spaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-23, August.
    17. Berglund, Christer, 2006. "The assessment of households' recycling costs: The role of personal motives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 560-569, April.
    18. Baranzini, Andrea & Faust, Anne-Kathrin & Huberman, David, 2010. "Tropical forest conservation: Attitudes and preferences," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(5), pages 370-376, June.
    19. Geßner, Christian & Weinreich, Sigurd, 1998. "Externe Kosten des Straßen- und Schienenverkehrslärms am Beispiel der Strecke Frankfurt - Basel," ZEW Dokumentationen 98-08, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    20. Madhushree Sekher, 2003. "Indigenous Institutions And Forest Conservation: User- Group Self-Initiatives In India," Working Papers 140, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:ags:uqseee:48976. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/decuqau.html .

    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.