IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Recreational shellfish harvesting and health risks: A pseudo-panel approach combining revealed and stated preference data with correction for on-site sampling

  • Beaumais, Olivier
  • Appéré, Gildas

This paper assesses the value of health risks related to recreational shellfish harvesting. Combining revealed and stated preferences data from an on-site survey and using a pseudo-panel approach shows that people significantly value health risks. The combination of stated and revealed preferences data is realised through the introduction of the concept of a "hypothetical twin site". Addressing on-site sampling issues within the framework of a random-effect Poisson gamma model allows a derivation of more accurate estimates of welfare measures. Results also suggest that the demand for recreational shellfish harvesting is an inferior good.

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.

File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VDY-50T35X1-1/2/0bf1ed2a80f639936352e7f4cff34c51
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Ecological Economics.

Volume (Year): 69 (2010)
Issue (Month): 12 (October)
Pages: 2315-2322

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:69:y:2010:i:12:p:2315-2322
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon

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.:

as in new window
  1. Egan, Kevin J. & Herriges, Joseph A., 2006. "Multivariate Count Data Regression Models with Individual Panel Data from an On-Site Sample," Staff General Research Papers 12573, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  2. 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 104-12, February.
  3. Nick Hanley & Begona Alvarez-Farizo, . "Valuing the Benefits of Coastal Water Quality Improvements using Contingent and Real Behaviour," Working Papers 2002_9, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow, revised Sep 2002.
  4. Joseph Hilbe, 1994. "Negative binomial regression," Stata Technical Bulletin, StataCorp LP, vol. 3(18).
  5. Maria A. Cunha-e-S� & Maria M. Ducla-Soares & Lu�s C. Nunes & Philippe Polomé, 2004. "Consistency in Mixed Demand Systems: Contingent Valuation and Travel Cost Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 444-454.
  6. Marit E. Kragt & Peter C. Roebeling & Arjan Ruijs, 2009. "Effects of Great Barrier Reef degradation on recreational reef-trip demand: a contingent behaviour approach ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(2), pages 213-229, 04.
  7. Shaw, Daigee, 1988. "On-site samples' regression : Problems of non-negative integers, truncation, and endogenous stratification," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 211-223, February.
  8. John Whitehead & Daniel Phaneuf & Christopher Dumas & Jim Herstine & Jeffery Hill & Bob Buerger, 2010. "Convergent Validity of Revealed and Stated Recreation Behavior with Quality Change: A Comparison of Multiple and Single Site Demands," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 91-112, January.
  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.
  10. Richard D. Smith, 2003. "Construction of the contingent valuation market in health care:a critical assessment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(8), pages 609-628.
  11. Jeffrey Englin & Trudy Cameron, 1996. "Augmenting travel cost models with contingent behavior data," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(2), pages 133-147, March.
  12. Trudy Ann Cameron, 1992. "Combining Contingent Valuation and Travel Cost Data for the Valuation of Nonmarket Goods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 302-317.
  13. Whitehead, John C. & Haab, Timothy C. & Huang, Ju-Chin, 2000. "Measuring recreation benefits of quality improvements with revealed and stated behavior data," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 339-354, October.
  14. Hammitt, James K & Graham, John D, 1999. "Willingness to Pay for Health Protection: Inadequate Sensitivity to Probability?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 33-62, April.
  15. Klaus Moeltner & J. Scott Shonkwiler, 2005. "Correcting for On-Site Sampling in Random Utility Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 327-339.
  16. von Haefen, Roger H., 2007. "Empirical strategies for incorporating weak complementarity into consumer demand models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 15-31, July.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:69:y:2010:i:12:p:2315-2322. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.