IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v181y2025ics1389934125002485.html

Visitors' experience with conservation areas and their willingness-to-pay for the preservation of old-growth forests

Author

Listed:
  • Getzner, Michael
  • Kovarovics, Anna
  • Kirchmeir, Hanns
  • Posch, Larissa
  • Alessandrelli, Claudia
  • Celis, Caroline
  • Mayrhofer, Simone
  • Vanhaecht, Ruth

Abstract

The experience of recreationists is known to influence their willingness-to-pay for conservation. This paper presents key findings from a survey of visitors to three old-growth forests in Austria, Italy and Belgium. The results show that respondents hold preferences for nature conservation in regard to the expansion of old-growth and more naturally managed forests for their recreational purposes. Respondents indicated that they would be willing to pay between €2.1 and €4.1 per person a day to fund conservation management. The questionnaire identified the paths and areas where visitors spent their time in the forest. This approach makes it easier to distinguish between the actual use and the presence of old-growth forest. Visitors who experienced old-growth forests also expressed a higher willingness-to-pay for the conservation of these ecosystems. This is also an important finding for conservation management: While there are differences between socio-economic groups and the three forests, visitors who experienced the old-growth forests had a higher willingness-to-pay of roughly €1 per person a day. These results clearly show that visitors value recreation in old-growth forests, and that conservation management could capitalize on this higher valuation by directing visitors to areas associated with high biodiversity values while protecting sensitive areas and funding conservation activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Getzner, Michael & Kovarovics, Anna & Kirchmeir, Hanns & Posch, Larissa & Alessandrelli, Claudia & Celis, Caroline & Mayrhofer, Simone & Vanhaecht, Ruth, 2025. "Visitors' experience with conservation areas and their willingness-to-pay for the preservation of old-growth forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:181:y:2025:i:c:s1389934125002485
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103669
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934125002485
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103669?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrzej Długoński & Thilo Wellmann & Dagmar Haase, 2023. "Old-Growth Forests in Urban Nature Reserves: Balancing Risks for Visitors and Biodiversity Protection in Warsaw, Poland," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-24, January.
    2. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    3. Johansson,Per-Olov, 1993. "Cost-Benefit Analysis of Environmental Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521447928, Enero-Abr.
    4. King, Peter M. & Dallimer, Martin & Lundhede, Thomas & Austen, Gail E. & Fisher, Jessica C. & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fish, Robert D. & Davies, Zoe G., 2025. "Stated preferences for the colours, smells, and sounds of biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    5. W. George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa & Susan M. Chilton & T. McCallion, 2001. "Parametric and Non‐Parametric Estimates of Willingness to Pay for Forest Recreation in Northern Ireland: A Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Study with Follow‐Ups," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 104-122, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giffoni, Francesco & Florio, Massimo, 2023. "Public support of science: A contingent valuation study of citizens' attitudes about CERN with and without information about implicit taxes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    2. David A. Comerford & Nick Hanley, 2017. "The External Validity of Consequential Stated Preference Studies: a comment," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2017-02, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    3. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    4. Shr, Yau-Huo (Jimmy) & Zhang, Wendong, 2024. "Omitted downstream attributes and the benefits of nutrient reductions: Implications for choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    5. Zawojska, Ewa & Czajkowski, Mikotaj, "undated". "Are preferences stated in web vs. personal interviews different? A comparison of willingness to pay results for a large multi-country study of the Baltic Sea eutrophication reduction," Annual Meeting, 2017, June 18-21, Montreal, Canada 258604, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society.
    6. Bente Halvorsen, 2009. "Conflicting Interests in Environmental Policy-making?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(2), pages 287-305, October.
    7. Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Henrik Andersson & Olivier Beaumais & Romain Crastes dit Sourd & Stephane Hess & François-Charles Wolf, 2017. "Stated preferences: a unique database composed of 1657recent published articles in journals relatedto agriculture, environment, or health," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 98(3), pages 201-220.
    8. Cabeza Martínez, Begoña, 2023. "Social preferences, support for redistribution, and attitudes towards vulnerable groups," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    9. Dugstad, Anders & Grimsrud, Kristine & Kipperberg, Gorm & Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2020. "Acceptance of wind power development and exposure – Not-in-anybody's-backyard," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    10. Celia Bilbao-Terol, 2009. "Impacts of an Iron and Steel Plant on Residential Property Values," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(9), pages 1421-1436, September.
    11. Loureiro, Maria L. & Loomis, John B. & Nahuelhual, Laura, 2004. "A comparison of a parametric and a non-parametric method to value a non-rejectable public good," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 61-74, September.
    12. Waranan Tantiwat & Christopher Gan & Wei Yang, 2021. "The Estimation of the Willingness to Pay for Air-Quality Improvement in Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    13. Eva Wanek & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde & Alda Mari, 2024. "Desire, moral evaluation or sense of duty: The modal framing of stated preference elicitation," Environmental Values, , vol. 33(4), pages 434-459, August.
    14. Stina Hökby & Tore Söderqvist, 2003. "Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay for Environmental Services in Sweden," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(3), pages 361-383, November.
    15. Lim, Sungmin & Choi, Syngjoo & Hong, Jong Ho & Kim, Booyuel & Lee, Heerae & Shin, Jinwook, 2025. "Promoting willingness to pay for environmental charges in electricity tariff: Evidence from a randomized survey experiment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    16. John C. Whitehead & Gregory Howard & Louis Cornicelli, 2025. "Total Economic Valuation of Great Lakes Recreational Fisheries: Attribute Nonattendance, Hypothetical Bias, and Insensitivity to Scope," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 101(4), pages 550-565.
    17. Daniel Rondeau & Christian A. Vossler, 2024. "Incentive compatibility and respondent beliefs: Consequentiality and game form," Working Papers 2024-02, University of Tennessee, Department of Economics.
    18. Fabien Giauque & Mehdi Farsi, 2026. "Securing the grid or preserving the planet? The impact of dynamic norms on electricity sufficiency," IRENE Working Papers 26-01, IRENE Institute of Economic Research.
    19. Nguyen, Thanh Cong & Le, Hoa Thu & Nguyen, Hang Dieu & Ngo, Mai Thanh & Nguyen, Hong Quang, 2021. "Examining ordering effects and strategic behaviour in a discrete choice experiment," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 394-413.
    20. Wilson, Jeffrey J. & Lantz, Van A. & MacLean, David A., 2010. "A benefit-cost analysis of establishing protected natural areas in New Brunswick, Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 94-103, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:forpol:v:181:y:2025:i:c:s1389934125002485. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.