IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v92y2013icp48-57.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modelling and mapping spatial heterogeneity in forest recreation services

Author

Listed:
  • Termansen, Mette
  • McClean, Colin J.
  • Jensen, Frank Søndergaard

Abstract

Modelling and spatial mapping of recreation services require attention to both demand and supply factors. This paper combines recreational choice modelling and economic valuation with GIS based techniques to allow an assessment of the spatial diversity of the value of forest recreation services. The data for the analysis is a national study of the car borne recreational use of Danish forest sites. A random utility framework is used and a comparison between the standard fixed coefficient model and a mixed logit model is made. The results show that the different specifications of the random utility models reveal similar preferences for the measured forest attributes in terms of sign and magnitude. The spatial predictions, however, reveal a considerable difference in the spatial pattern of economic benefits from recreation between the two models. These results have implications for current ecosystem service mapping initiatives as they emphasise the need to account for spatial heterogeneity in preferences, and aggregate demand and environmental attributes and infrastructure.

Suggested Citation

  • Termansen, Mette & McClean, Colin J. & Jensen, Frank Søndergaard, 2013. "Modelling and mapping spatial heterogeneity in forest recreation services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 48-57.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:92:y:2013:i:c:p:48-57
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.05.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800913001596
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George R. Parsons & GAndrew J. Plantinga & GKevin J. Boyle, 2000. "Narrow Choice Sets in a Random Utility Model of Recreation Demand," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(1), pages 86-99.
    2. Danny Campbell & W George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa, 2009. "Using choice experiments to explore the spatial distribution of willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 41(1), pages 97-111, January.
    3. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    4. Hausman, Jerry A. & Leonard, Gregory K. & McFadden, Daniel, 1995. "A utility-consistent, combined discrete choice and count data model Assessing recreational use losses due to natural resource damage," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 1-30, January.
    5. Donato Romano & Riccardo Scarpa & Fiorenza Spalatro & Laura Viganò, 2000. "Modelling Determinants of Participation, Number of Trips and Site Choice for Outdoor Recreation in Protected Areas," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 224-238.
    6. 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.
    7. Bateman, Ian J. & Day, Brett H. & Georgiou, Stavros & Lake, Iain, 2006. "The aggregation of environmental benefit values: Welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 450-460, December.
    8. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, October.
    9. Kling, Catherine L. & Bockstael, Nancy & Hanemann, W. Michael, 1987. "Estimating the Value of Water Quality Improvements in a Recreational Demand Framework," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1594, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    10. McConnell, Kenneth E., 1985. "The economics of outdoor recreation," Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics,in: A. V. Kneese† & J. L. Sweeney (ed.), Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 677-722 Elsevier.
    11. Parsons George R. & Kealy Mary Jo, 1995. "A Demand Theory for Number of Trips in a Random Utility Model of Recreation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 357-367, November.
    12. Joseph A. Herriges & Daniel J. Phaneuf, 2002. "Inducing Patterns of Correlation and Substitution in Repeated Logit Models of Recreation Demand," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(4), pages 1076-1090.
    13. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    14. Zandersen, Marianne & Tol, Richard S.J., 2009. "A meta-analysis of forest recreation values in Europe," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 109-130, January.
    15. Kenneth E. Train, 1998. "Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences over People," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 230-239.
    16. Feather Peter & Hellerstein Daniel & Tomasi Theodore, 1995. "A Discrete-Count Model of Recreational Demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 214-227, September.
    17. W. Douglas Shaw & J. Scott Shonkwiler, 2000. "Brand Choice and Purchase Frequency Revisited: An Application to Recreation Behavior," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(3), pages 515-526.
    18. 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.
    19. Joseph A. Herriges & Catherine L. Kling, 1999. "Nonlinear Income Effects in Random Utility Models," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(1), pages 62-72, February.
    20. Bill Provencher & Kenneth A. Baerenklau & Richard C. Bishop, 2002. "A Finite Mixture Logit Model of Recreational Angling with Serially Correlated Random Utility," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(4), pages 1066-1075.
    21. Broch, Stine Wamberg & Strange, Niels & Jacobsen, Jette B. & Wilson, Kerrie A., 2013. "Farmers' willingness to provide ecosystem services and effects of their spatial distribution," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 78-86.
    22. Ian J. Bateman & Guy D. Garrod & Julii S. Brainard & Andrew A. Lovett, 1996. "Measurement Issues In The Travel Cost Method: A Geographical Information Systems Approach," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1-4), pages 191-205.
    23. Heng Z. Chen & Stephen R. Cosslett, 1998. "Environmental Quality Preference and Benefit Estimation in Multinomial Probit Models: A Simulation Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(3), pages 512-520.
    24. I.J. Bateman & A.P. Jones & A.A. Lovett & I.R. Lake & B.H. Day, 2002. "Applying Geographical Information Systems (GIS) to Environmental and Resource Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 219-269, June.
    25. Marianne Zandersen & Mette Termansen & Frank Søndergaard Jensen, 2007. "Testing Benefits Transfer of Forest Recreation Values over a Twenty-Year Time Horizon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(3), pages 412-440.
    26. George R. Parsons & Mary Jo Kealy, 1992. "Randomly Drawn Opportunity Sets in a Random Utility Model of Lake Recreation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(1), pages 93-106.
    27. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    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. repec:eee:ecoser:v:29:y:2018:i:pc:p:515-528 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:eee:foreco:v:28:y:2017:i:c:p:33-41 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. De Valck, Jeremy & Broekx, Steven & Liekens, Inge & Aertsens, Joris & Vranken, Liesbet, 2014. "Testing the influence of substitutes in nature valuation by using spatial discounting factors," Working Papers 182808, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    4. Vedel, Suzanne Elizabeth & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2015. "Contracts for afforestation and the role of monitoring for landowners’ willingness to accept," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 29-37.
    5. repec:eee:ecoser:v:23:y:2017:i:c:p:158-164 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Nielsen, Anne Sofie Elberg & Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2016. "Local consequences of national policies - A spatial analysis of preferences for forest access reduction," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 68-77.
    7. repec:kap:enreec:v:68:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s10640-016-0048-9 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Jeremy Valck & Steven Broekx & Inge Liekens & Joris Aertsens & Liesbet Vranken, 2017. "Testing the Influence of Substitute Sites in Nature Valuation by Using Spatial Discounting Factors," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 66(1), pages 17-43, January.
    9. repec:eee:ecolec:v:140:y:2017:i:c:p:22-29 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. repec:eee:ecoser:v:31:y:2018:i:pc:p:420-432 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. repec:eee:ecoser:v:31:y:2018:i:pc:p:445-454 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. repec:eee:ecoser:v:29:y:2018:i:pc:p:452-464 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Marianne Zandersen & Uzma Aslam & Ioannis Angelidis & Thomas Becker & Wiktor Budziński & Katarzyna Zagórska, 2018. "Recreational Value of the Baltic Sea: a Spatially Explicit Site Choice Model Accounting for Environmental Conditions," Working Papers 2018-11, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    14. Boncinelli, Fabio & Riccioli, Francesco & Marone, Enrico, 2015. "Do forests help to keep my body mass index low?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 11-17.
    15. Laetitia Tuffery, 2016. "The recreational services value of the nearest periurban forest versus the global forest environment," Documents de recherche 16-06, Centre d'Études des Politiques Économiques (EPEE), Université d'Evry Val d'Essonne.
    16. Bertram, Christine & Larondelle, Neele, 2017. "Going to the Woods Is Going Home: Recreational Benefits of a Larger Urban Forest Site — A Travel Cost Analysis for Berlin, Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 255-263.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:92:y:2013:i:c:p:48-57. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.