IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qld/uq2004/622.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Adding Jewels To The Crown: The Marginal Recreational Value Of Noosa National Park And Implications For User Fees

Author

Listed:
  • Boyd D. Blackwell

    (AquaEquis Consulting
    Centre for Ecology and Biodiversity, Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania.
    Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, The Australian National University.)

  • John Asafu-Adjaye

    (School of Economics, University of Queensland)

Abstract

This study assesses the economic value held by recreational users for the replication of Noosa National Park, Australia. The lower bound benefits accruing to recreational users amounts to $19 per person per visit, resulting in a total annual use value of approximately $28 m-$44 m. We find a significant proportion of park users also hold non-use values for the park. The results lend weight to calls for the preservation of national parks with similar attributes. While user pays may present opportunities for better management of parks, user fees can be politically unpalatable, prevent equity in access, and create perverse incentives to create and manage parks solely for their recreational values rather than the broader set of ecosystem goods and services they provide.

Suggested Citation

  • Boyd D. Blackwell & John Asafu-Adjaye, 2020. "Adding Jewels To The Crown: The Marginal Recreational Value Of Noosa National Park And Implications For User Fees," Discussion Papers Series 622, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    • Handle: RePEc:qld:uq2004:622
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.uq.edu.au/files/39646/622.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cohen, Mark A., 1986. "The costs and benefits of oil spill prevention and enforcement," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 167-188, June.
    2. Brian P. Vander Naald & Trudy Ann Cameron, 2017. "Payment Vehicles for Public Goods: Evidence from California’s Proposition 21," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 93(1), pages 145-164.
    3. Sil, Ângelo & Fernandes, Paulo M. & Rodrigues, Ana Paula & Alonso, Joaquim M. & Honrado, João P. & Perera, Ajith & Azevedo, João C., 2019. "Farmland abandonment decreases the fire regulation capacity and the fire protection ecosystem service in mountain landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Crost, Benjamin & Duquennois, Claire & Felter, Joseph H. & Rees, Daniel I., 2018. "Climate change, agricultural production and civil conflict: Evidence from the Philippines," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 379-395.
    5. Quiggin, John C., 2001. "Environmental economics and the Murray-Darling river system," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(1), pages 1-28.
    6. Jeffrey W. Bennett, 1984. "Using Direct Questioning To Value The Existence Benefits Of Preserved Natural Areas," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 28(2-3), pages 136-152, 08-12.
    7. Richard T. Carson, 2012. "Contingent Valuation: A Practical Alternative When Prices Aren't Available," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 27-42, Fall.
    8. Rolfe, John & Bennett, Jeff & Louviere, Jordan, 2000. "Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 289-302, November.
    9. David S. Brookshire & Larry S. Eubanks & Alan Randall, 1983. "Estimating Option Prices and Existence Values for Wildlife Resources," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 59(1), pages 1-15.
    10. Thur, Steven M., 2010. "User fees as sustainable financing mechanisms for marine protected areas: An application to the Bonaire National Marine Park," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 63-69, January.
    11. Tisdell, Clem & Wilson, Clevo & Swarna Nantha, Hemanath, 2008. "Contingent valuation as a dynamic process," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1443-1458, August.
    12. Pearson, L. J. & Tisdell, C. & Lisle, A. T., 2002. "The Impact of Noosa National Park on Surrounding Property Values: An Application of the Hedonic Price Method," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 155-171, June Spec.
    13. Christopher M. Fleming & Matthew Manning, 2015. "Rationing Access to Protected Natural Areas: An Australian Case Study," Tourism Economics, , vol. 21(5), pages 995-1014, October.
    14. Alicia García Herrero, 2020. "The Pandemic Requires a Coordinated Global Economic Response," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 55(2), pages 66-67, March.
    15. Vardon, Michael & Keith, Heather & Lindenmayer, David, 2019. "Accounting and valuing the ecosystem services related to water supply in the Central Highlands of Victoria, Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    16. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    17. Clement A. Tisdell, 2017. "Economics and Environmental Change," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15534.
    18. Kay, J A & Thompson, D J, 1986. "Privatisation: A Policy in Search of a Rationale," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(381), pages 18-32, March.
    19. Jerry Hausman, 2012. "Contingent Valuation: From Dubious to Hopeless," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 43-56, Fall.
    20. Harrison, Glenn W. & Lesley, James C., 1996. "Must Contingent Valuation Surveys Cost So Much?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 79-95, July.
    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. Halkos, George & Leonti, Aikaterini & Sardianou, Eleni, 2022. "Determinants of willingness to pay for entrance to urban parks: A quantile regression analysis," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 421-431.

    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. Tonin, Stefania, 2018. "Citizens’ perspectives on marine protected areas as a governance strategy to effectively preserve marine ecosystem services and biodiversity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 189-200.
    2. Ahlheim, Michael & Schneider, Friedrich, 2013. "Considering Household Size in Contingent Valuation Studies," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79974, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    3. Artem Korzhenevych & Charles Kofi Owusu, 2021. "Renewable Minigrid Electrification in Off-Grid Rural Ghana: Exploring Households Willingness to Pay," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-17, October.
    4. Levan Elbakidze & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2018. "The Adding-Up Test in an Incentivized Value Elicitation Mechanism: The Role of the Income Effect," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(3), pages 625-644, November.
    5. Cook, David & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Kristófersson, Daði Már, 2016. "Energy projects in Iceland – Advancing the case for the use of economic valuation techniques to evaluate environmental impacts," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 104-113.
    6. Caffey, Rex H. & Wang, Hua & Petrolia, Daniel R., 2014. "Trajectory economics: Assessing the flow of ecosystem services from coastal restoration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 74-84.
    7. John C. Whitehead, 2024. "They doth protest too much, methinks: Reply to “Reply to Whitehead”," Working Papers 24-04, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    8. Timothy C. Haab & Matthew G. Interis & Daniel R. Petrolia & John C. Whitehead, 2013. "From Hopeless to Curious? Thoughts on Hausman's 'Dubious to Hopeless' Critique of Contingent Valuation," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 35(4), pages 593-612.
    9. Whitehead, John C., 2016. "Plausible responsiveness to scope in contingent valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 17-22.
    10. Nicole Maestas & Kathleen J. Mullen & David Powell & Till von Wachter & Jeffrey B. Wenger, 2023. "The Value of Working Conditions in the United States and the Implications for the Structure of Wages," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(7), pages 2007-2047, July.
    11. Amoah, Anthony & Ferrini, Silvia & Schaafsma, Marije, 2019. "Electricity outages in Ghana: Are contingent valuation estimates valid?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    12. Hammitt, James K. & Herrera-Araujo, Daniel, 2018. "Peeling back the onion: Using latent class analysis to uncover heterogeneous responses to stated preference surveys," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 165-189.
    13. 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.
    14. Mouter, Niek & Cabral, Manuel Ojeda & Dekker, Thijs & van Cranenburgh, Sander, 2019. "The value of travel time, noise pollution, recreation and biodiversity: A social choice valuation perspective," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    15. Neuteleers, Stijn & Engelen, Bart, 2015. "Talking money: How market-based valuation can undermine environmental protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 253-260.
    16. Oerlemans, Leon A.G. & Chan, Kai-Ying & Volschenk, Jako, 2016. "Willingness to pay for green electricity: A review of the contingent valuation literature and its sources of error," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 875-885.
    17. Julia Martin‐Ortega & M. Azahara Mesa‐Jurado & Julio Berbel, 2015. "Revisiting the Impact of Order Effects on Sensitivity to Scope: A Contingent Valuation of a Common‐Pool Resource," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 705-726, September.
    18. Moisés Carrasco Garcés & Felipe Vasquez-Lavin & Roberto D. Ponce Oliva & José Luis Bustamante Oporto & Manuel Barrientos & Arcadio A. Cerda, 2021. "Embedding effect and the consequences of advanced disclosure: evidence from the valuation of cultural goods," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 1039-1062, August.
    19. Diriba Abdeta, 2022. "Households' willingness to pay for forest conservation in Ethiopia: A review," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(11), pages 437-451.
    20. Rushton, Michael, 2022. "The Economic Approach to Public Funding for the Arts," MPRA Paper 113405, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Protected areas; economic values; non-market valuation; user pays; estate expansion;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:qld:uq2004:622. 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: SOE IT (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.