Does ignoring multidestination trips in the travel cost method cause a systematic bias?
The present paper demonstrates that treating multidestination trips (MDT) as single-destination trips does not involve any systematic upward or downward bias in consumer surplus (CS) estimates because the direct negative effect of a price increase (treating MDT as a single-destination trip) is offset by a shift in the estimated demand curve. Still, ignoring MDT can greatly underestimate or overestimate the CS. In addition, we demonstrate that there is a sound theoretical basis for using preference information for allocating travel costs between different sites included in the MDT package. A novel extreme value approach is proposed, which does not require any overly restrictive assumptions about consumer preferences. This approach is applied to the zonal travel cost model of the Bellenden Ker National Park, Australia. Parametric and non-parametric estimation techniques are used for calculating CS estimates, and the effects of different MDT treatments and estimation methods are compared. Copyright Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society Inc. and Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2004.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 48 (2004)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: AARES Central Office Manager, Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU, Canberra ACT 0200|
Phone: 0409 032 338
Web page: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8489
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://ordering.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/subs.asp?ref=1467-8489&doi=10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8489|
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.:
- Nick Hanley & Robin Ruffell, 1992.
"The Valuation of Forest Characteristics,"
Working Papers Series
92/10, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
- Nick Hanley & Robin Ruffell, 1992. "The Valuation of Forest characteristics," Working Papers 849, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
- Joseph C. Cooper, 2000. "Nonparametric and Semi-Nonparametric Recreational Demand Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 451-462.
- Cooper, Joseph C., 1999. "Nonparametric and Semi-Nonparametric Recreational Demand Analysis," MPRA Paper 24780, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Robert Mendelsohn & John Hof & George Peterson & Reed Johnson, 1992. "Measuring Recreation Values with Multiple Destination Trips," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(4), pages 926-933.
- K. G. Willis & G. D. Garrod, 1991. "An Individual Travel-Cost Method Of Evaluating Forest Recreation," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(1), pages 33-42. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)