IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tea/wpaper/0709.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Negative Binomial Discrete Choice Model of Forestry Recreation in Ireland

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Hynes

    (Rural Economy and Development Programme, Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland)

  • Brian Cahill
  • Emma J. Dillon

    (Rural Economy and Development Programme, Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland)

Abstract

During the last decade, as the population of Ireland has become increasingly urbanised, there has been an increase in demand for outdoor recreational pursuits. Increased affluence, mobility and changing values have also brought new demands with respect to landscape, conservation, heritage and urban land use. This paper’s contribution to the understanding of outdoor recreational pursuits in Ireland is based on the estimation of the first urban forest recreation demand function. We use this empirical work to investigate the value of urban woodland space, in terms of public-good provision to local residents. Through the estimation of a travel cost model, the study derives the mean willingness to pay of the average outdoors enthusiast using two urban forest sites in Co. Galway, Ireland. The results indicate the high value of urban forestry in Ireland from a recreational amenity perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Hynes & Brian Cahill & Emma J. Dillon, 2007. "A Negative Binomial Discrete Choice Model of Forestry Recreation in Ireland," Working Papers 0709, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
  • Handle: RePEc:tea:wpaper:0709
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.teagasc.ie/rural-economy/downloads/workingpapers/07wpre09.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2007
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scarpa, Riccardo & Chilton, Susan M. & Hutchinson, W. George & Buongiorno, Joseph, 2000. "Valuing the recreational benefits from the creation of nature reserves in Irish forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-250, May.
    2. Michael D. Creel & John B. Loomis, 1990. "Theoretical and Empirical Advantages of Truncated Count Data Estimators for Analysis of Deer Hunting in California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(2), pages 434-441.
    3. Clinch, J Peter & Murphy, Anthony, 2001. "Modelling Winners and Losers in Contingent Valuation of Public Goods: Appropriate Welfare Measures and Econometric Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(470), pages 420-443, April.
    4. Englin, Jeffrey & Shonkwiler, J S, 1995. "Estimating Social Welfare Using Count Data Models: An Application to Long-Run Recreation Demand under Conditions of Endogenous Stratification and Truncation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(1), pages 104-112, February.
    5. Cameron, A Colin & Trivedi, Pravin K, 1986. "Econometric Models Based on Count Data: Comparisons and Applications of Some Estimators and Tests," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 1(1), pages 29-53, January.
    6. Edward R. Morey & Robert D. Rowe & Michael Watson, 1993. "A Repeated Nested-Logit Model of Atlantic Salmon Fishing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(3), pages 578-592.
    7. Loomis, John B. & Yorizane, Shizuka & Larson, Douglas M., 2000. "Testing Significance Of Multi-Destination And Multi-Purpose Trip Effects In A Travel Cost Method Demand Model For Whale Watching Trips," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 29(2), pages 1-9, October.
    8. Daniel Hellerstein & Robert Mendelsohn, 1993. "A Theoretical Foundation for Count Data Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(3), pages 604-611.
    9. John A. Curtis, 2002. "Estimating the Demand for Salmon Angling in Ireland," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 33(3), pages 319-332.
    10. Lisa A. Offenbach & Barry K. Goodwin, 1994. "A Travel-Cost Analysis of the Demand for Hunting Trips in Kansas," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 16(1), pages 55-61.
    11. Grogger, J T & Carson, Richard T, 1991. "Models for Truncated Counts," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 225-238, July-Sept.
    12. Nick Hanley & W. Douglass Shaw & Robert E. Wright (ed.), 2003. "The New Economics of Outdoor Recreation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2712.
    13. Kalyan Chakraborty & John Keith, 2000. "Estimating the Recreation Demand and Economic Value of Mountain Biking in Moab, Utah: An Application of Count Data Models," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 461-469.
    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. Stephen Hynes & Cathal Buckley & Tom van Rensburg, 2007. "Recreational Pursuits on Marginal Farm Land: A Discrete-Choice Model of Irish Farm Commonage Recreation," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 38(1), pages 63-84.
    2. John A. Curtis, 2002. "Estimating the Demand for Salmon Angling in Ireland," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 33(3), pages 319-332.
    3. Stephen Hynes & Cathal Buckley & Tom van Rensburg, 2006. "Agricultural versus Recreational Activity on Marginal Farm Land: A Discrete-Choice Model of Recreational Activity on Irish Farm Commonage," Working Papers 0603, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    4. Roberto Martinez-Espineira & Joe Amoako-Tuffour, 2008. "Multi-destination and multi-purpose trip effects in the analysis of the demand for trips to a remote recreational site," EERI Research Paper Series EERI_RP_2008_19, Economics and Econometrics Research Institute (EERI), Brussels.
    5. Isabel Mendes & Isabel Proença, 2005. "Estimating the Recreation Value of Ecosystems by Using a Travel Cost Method Approach," Working Papers Department of Economics 2005/08, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    6. John Cullinan & Stephen Hynes & Cathal O’Donoghue, 2008. "Aggregating Consumer Surplus Values in Travel Cost Modelling Using Spatial Microsimulation and GIS Techniques," Working Papers 0807, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    7. Amoako-Tuffour, Joe & Martınez-Espineira, Roberto, 2008. "Leisure and the Opportunity Cost of Travel Time in Recreation Demand Analysis: A Re-Examination," MPRA Paper 8573, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Bowker, James Michael & Starbuck, C. Meghan & English, Donald B.K. & Bergstrom, John C. & Rosenberger, Randall S. & McCollum, Daniel W., 2009. "Estimating the Net Economic Value of National Forest Recreation: An Application of the National Visitor Use Monitoring Database," Faculty Series 59603, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    9. Shrestha, Ram K. & Seidl, Andrew F. & Moraes, Andre S., 2002. "Value of recreational fishing in the Brazilian Pantanal: a travel cost analysis using count data models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 289-299, August.
    10. Sarker, Rakhal & Surry, Yves R., 2003. "The Fast Decay Process In Recreational Demand Activities And The Use Of Alternative Count Data Models," Working Papers 34147, University of Guelph, Department of Food, Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    11. Grilli, Gianluca & Curtis, John & Hynes, Stephen & Landgraf, Gavin, 2017. "The value of tourist angling: a travel cost method estimation of demand for two destination salmon rivers in Ireland," Papers WP570, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    12. Curtis, John & Stanley, Brian, 2015. "Water Quality and Recreational Angling Demand in Ireland," Papers WP521, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    13. Isabel Mendes & Isabel Proença, 2009. "Measuring the Social Recreation Per-Day Net Benefit of Wildlife Amenities of a National Park: A Count-Data Travel Cost Approach," Working Papers Department of Economics 2009/35, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    14. Mahadev Bhat & Ramachandra Bhatta & Mohamed Shumais, 2014. "Sustainable funding policies for environmental protection: the case of Maldivian atolls," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 16(1), pages 45-67, January.
    15. Paul Mwebaze & Jeff Bennett, 2012. "Valuing Australian botanic collections: a combined travel-cost and contingent valuation study," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(4), pages 498-520, October.
    16. Chin†Huang Huang, 2017. "Estimating the environmental effects and recreational benefits of cultivated flower land for environmental quality improvement in Taiwan," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 29-39, January.
    17. Erik Wallentin, 2016. "Choice of the angler," Tourism Economics, , vol. 22(6), pages 1338-1351, December.
    18. Serge Garcia & Julien Jacob, 2010. "La valeur récréative de la forêt en France : une approche par les coûts de déplacement," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 91(1), pages 43-71.
    19. Lea Tardieu & Sébastien Roussel & Jean-Michel Salles, 2012. "Recreation demand analysis of natural areas: a revealed-preference approach," Post-Print hal-02746734, HAL.
    20. Starbuck, C. Meghan & Berrens, Robert P. & McKee, Michael, 2006. "Simulating changes in forest recreation demand and associated economic impacts due to fire and fuels management activities," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 52-66, January.

    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:tea:wpaper:0709. 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: John Lennon (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/reteaie.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.