IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/foreco/v21y2015i3p131-151.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multifunctional recreation and nouveau heritage values in plantation forests

Author

Listed:
  • Rolfe, John
  • Windle, Jill

Abstract

Recreation benefits constitute a substantial part of the total economic value of forests in modern societies, and are an increasingly important determinant in multi-functional forest management. Heritage sites, such as historic buildings open to visitation, are important parts of some recreation experiences, yet people who do not visit may also view their protection as important. However, few studies have examined the importance of heritage sites as part of the recreational experience or tried to compare their importance for recreational users versus the general public, even though these issues are central to management decisions. In this study, a choice modelling experiment was conducted in Australia to estimate the marginal values for improvements in recreation facilities (trails, day and night facilities) and historic sites in State plantation forests. The aim of the study was to examine the relative importance of historic sites as an attribute of forest recreation, and explore preference heterogeneity for various attributes of forest recreation across different forest areas and forest users. The results indicate that while there was significant preference heterogeneity for the different recreational attributes at two forest areas, there was less variation in the welfare estimates across attributes, sites and between user and non-user groups. Similar values were identified for the Heritage sites between recreational users and non-users, indicating that protection values were dominant over recreational use; yet no sub-group of the sampled population appeared to value Heritage sites in isolation from recreational assets, suggesting that respondents viewed the forests in multifunctional dimensions.

Suggested Citation

  • Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2015. "Multifunctional recreation and nouveau heritage values in plantation forests," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 131-151.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:foreco:v:21:y:2015:i:3:p:131-151
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jfe.2015.06.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1104689915000331
    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. David Maddisson & Susana Mourato, 2002. "Valuing Different Road Options for Stonehenge," Chapters,in: Valuing Cultural Heritage, chapter 7 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Abildtrup, Jens & Garcia, Serge & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Stenger, Anne, 2013. "Spatial preference heterogeneity in forest recreation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 67-77.
    3. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, January.
    4. Cubbage, Frederick & Harou, Patrice & Sills, Erin, 2007. "Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 833-851, April.
    5. 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.
    6. Ian J. Bateman & Andrew P. Jones, 2003. "Contrasting Conventional with Multi-Level Modeling Approaches to Meta-Analysis: Expectation Consistency in U.K. Woodland Recreation Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(2), pages 235-258.
    7. Brey, Raul & Riera, Pere & Mogas, Joan, 2007. "Estimation of forest values using choice modeling: An application to Spanish forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 305-312, December.
    8. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-719, November.
    9. Barrio, Melina & Loureiro, Maria L., 2010. "A meta-analysis of contingent valuation forest studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1023-1030, March.
    10. Gregory L. Poe & Kelly L. Giraud & John B. Loomis, 2005. "Computational Methods for Measuring the Difference of Empirical Distributions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 353-365.
    11. Juutinen, Artti & Mitani, Yohei & Mäntymaa, Erkki & Shoji, Yasushi & Siikamäki, Pirkko & Svento, Rauli, 2011. "Combining ecological and recreational aspects in national park management: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1231-1239, April.
    12. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Bartczak, Anna & Giergiczny, Marek & Navrud, Stale & Żylicz, Tomasz, 2014. "Providing preference-based support for forest ecosystem service management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1-12.
    13. Lindhjem, Henrik, 2007. "20 years of stated preference valuation of non-timber benefits from Fennoscandian forests: A meta-analysis," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 251-277, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non-market valuation; Discrete choice experiments; Forest recreation; Cultural heritage; Historic sites; Non use value; Option value;

    JEL classification:

    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:foreco:v:21:y:2015:i:3:p:131-151. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/701775/description#description .

    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.