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

Using revealed and stated preference data to estimate the scope and access benefits associated with cave diving

  • Morgan, O. Ashton
  • Huth, William L.
Registered author(s):

    In a single-site travel cost model framework, revealed and stated preference data are jointly estimated to provide the first use-value estimate associated with recreational cave diving. Focusing on one of Florida's first magnitude springs, we estimate average per-person per-trip use values of approximately $155, generating annual cave diving use values in the region of $1075. Further, in an investigation of potential site quality changes, we find that divers are sensitive to scope effects with an additional cave system increasing annual per-person use values by approximately $100, while improved access yields an additional $50 in per-person annual consumer surplus. Finally, three additional model specifications are estimated and indicate that divers use different travel cost preferences when assessing their revealed and stated preference trip counts but a single preference structure to evaluate site quality changes.

    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/B6VFJ-4Y9SVRD-1/2/e090212ccad6c67120b9f70c5da427da
    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 Resource and Energy Economics.

    Volume (Year): 33 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 1 (January)
    Pages: 107-118

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:33:y:2011:i:1:p:107-118
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505569

    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. Moeltner K. & Englin J., 2004. "Choice Behavior Under Time-Variant Quality: State Dependence Versus," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 22, pages 214-224, April.
    2. 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.
    3. Jerry A. Hausman & Bronwyn H. Hall & Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," NBER Technical Working Papers 0017, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. John Whitehead, 2005. "Environmental Risk and Averting Behavior: Predictive Validity of Jointly Estimated Revealed and Stated Behavior Data," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(3), pages 301-316, November.
    5. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, 03.
    6. Huang, Ju-Chin & Haab, Timothy C. & Whitehead, John C., 1997. "Willingness to Pay for Quality Improvements: Should Revealed and Stated Preference Data Be Combined?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 240-255, November.
    7. John Loomis, 1993. "An investigation into the reliability of intended visitation behavior," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 3(2), pages 183-191, April.
    8. Neil A. Powe & Ian J. Bateman, 2004. "Investigating Insensitivity to Scope: A Split-Sample Test of Perceived Scheme Realism," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(2), pages 258-271.
    9. 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.
    10. John Whitehead & Suzanne Finney, 2003. "Willingness to Pay for Submerged Maritime Cultural Resources," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 231-240, November.
    11. Schkade David A. & Payne John W., 1994. "How People Respond to Contingent Valuation Questions: A Verbal Protocol Analysis of Willingness to Pay for an Environmental Regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 88-109, January.
    12. Provencher, Bill & Bishop, Richard C., 1997. "An Estimable Dynamic Model of Recreation Behavior with an Application to Great Lakes Angling," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 107-127, June.
    13. John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
    14. W. Douglass Shaw, 2002. "Testing the Validity of Contingent Behavior Trip Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(2), pages 401-414.
    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:resene:v:33:y:2011:i:1:p:107-118. 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.