Amenity values and payment schemes for free recreation services from non-industrial private forest properties: A French case study
Free-access recreation on private forest property is gaining in importance with the increasing social demand for forest-based recreation. The amended French Forest Law of 2001 provides for schemes with a voluntary contract, in terms of which private forest owners are paid to maintain an open-access forest for nature-based recreational activities, which are largely public goods. The main objective of this paper is to analyze private forest landowners' commitment to free-access recreation services on their properties. We develop a framework to estimate their willingness-to-accept (WTA) values as a measure of the financial compensation that they expect in exchange of reduced forest amenity values due to a public recreation use management plan. Since forest holdings are permanently exposed to several types of risk, the willingness-to-accept measure is defined within a subjective expected utility modeling approach. Our empirical analysis draws on data from a contingent valuation design carried out in 2006 in the Landes district in France. The empirical distribution of the subjective probability of fire risk is deduced from the forest owners' perception of fire risks due to free recreation use. We then introduce our measurements of the fire risk as explanatory variables of the forest owners' financial compensation requirements.
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): 16 (2010)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/701775/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/701775/bibliographic|
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.:
- Beach, Robert H. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Yang, Jui-Chen & Murray, Brian C. & Abt, Robert C., 2005. "Econometric studies of non-industrial private forest management: a review and synthesis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 261-281, March.
- Kahn, Barbara E & Sarin, Rakesh K, 1988. " Modeling Ambiguity in Decisions under Uncertainty," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(2), pages 265-72, September.
- Alejandro Caparrós & Pablo Campos & Gregorio Montero, 2003. "An Operative Framework for Total Hicksian Income Measurement: Application to a Multiple-Use Forest," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(2), pages 173-198, October.
- Amigues, Jean-Pierre & Boulatoff (Broadhead), Catherine & Desaigues, Brigitte & Gauthier, Caroline & Keith, John E., 2002. "The benefits and costs of riparian analysis habitat preservation: a willingness to accept/willingness to pay contingent valuation approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 17-31, November.
- Hogarth, Robin M & Kunreuther, Howard, 1989. " Risk, Ambiguity, and Insurance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 5-35, April.
- Peter Groothuis & John Whitehead, 2002.
"Does don't know mean no? Analysis of 'don't know' responses in dichotomous choice contingent valuation questions,"
Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(15), pages 1935-1940.
- Peter A. Groothuis & John C. Whitehead, 2002. "Does Don't Know Mean No? Analysis of 'Don't Know Responses in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Questions," Working Papers 02-15, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
- Peter A. Groothuis & John C. Whitehead, . "Does Don't Know Mean No? Analysis of 'Don't Know' Responses in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Questions," Working Papers 9814, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
- 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.
- Graham, Daniel A, 1981. "Cost-Benefit Analysis under Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(4), pages 715-25, September.
- Mary Riddel & W. Shaw, 2006. "A theoretically-consistent empirical model of non-expected utility: An application to nuclear-waste transport," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 131-150, March.
- W. Viscusi & Harrell Chesson, 1999. "Hopes and Fears: the Conflicting Effects of Risk Ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 157-184, October.
- Campos, Pablo & Caparros, Alejandro, 2006. "Social and private total Hicksian incomes of multiple use forests in Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 545-557, June.
- Janse, Gerben & Ottitsch, Andreas, 2005. "Factors influencing the role of Non-Wood Forest Products and Services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 309-319, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:foreco:v:16:y:2010:i:4:p:297-311. 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.