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

The Value of Changes in Deer Season Length: An Application of the Nested Multinomial Logit Model

  • Kurt Schwabe

    ()

  • Peter Schuhmann
  • Roy Boyd
  • Khosrow Doroodian
Registered author(s):

    Increasing deer populations can be controlled through manipulatingharvest limits or season length. While such actions often result in benefitsto hunters, both motorists and the agricultural sector also benefit as alower deer population leads to fewer incidences of harmful human-deerencounters. Traditional recreation demand models are often employed toexamine the welfare implications of changes in daily hunting bag limits.Studies measuring the effects of changes in season length, however, arenoticeably absent from the literature. This study uses a nested randomutility model to examine hunter choice over site and season selection toderive the values of changes in season length. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

    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://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1011121503549
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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 European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists in its journal Environmental and Resource Economics.

    Volume (Year): 19 (2001)
    Issue (Month): 2 (June)
    Pages: 131-147

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:19:y:2001:i:2:p:131-147
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100263

    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. Keith, John E. & Lyon, Kenneth S., 1985. "Valuing Wildlife Management: A Utah Deer Herd," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 10(02), December.
    2. 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.
    3. Daniel McFadden, 1987. "A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models Without Numerical Integration," Working papers 464, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
    4. Kling, Catherine L. & Bockstael, Nancy & Michael, W., 1999. "Estimating the Value of Water Quality Improvements in a Recreational Demand Framework," Staff General Research Papers 12334, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Kling, Catherine L. & Thomson, Cynthia J., 1996. "Implications of Model Specification for Welfare Estimation in Nested Logit Models (The)," Staff General Research Papers 1599, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    6. Borsch-Supan, Axel, 1990. "On the compatibility of nested logit models with utility maximization," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 373-388, March.
    7. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L., 1996. "Testing the consistency of nested logit models with utility maximization," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 33-39, January.
    8. Kling, Catherine L. & Herriges, Joseph A., 1995. "Empirical Investigation of the Consistency of Nested Logit Models with Utility Maximization (An)," Staff General Research Papers 1499, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    9. Daniel McFadden, 1977. "Quantitative Methods for Analyzing Travel Behaviour of Individuals: Some Recent Developments," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 474, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    10. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L., 1999. "Valuing Recreation and the Environment: Revealed Preference Methods in Theory and Practice, New Horizons in Environmental Economics," Staff General Research Papers 12330, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    11. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L., 2003. "Recreation Demand Models," Staff General Research Papers 10211, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Catherine L. Kling & Cynthia J. Thomson, 1996. "The Implications of Model Specification for Welfare Estimation in Nested Logit Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(1), pages 103-114.
    13. 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.
    14. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 1999. "Corner Solution Models of Recreation Demand: A Comparison of Competing Frameworks," Staff General Research Papers 1513, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    15. Herriges, Joseph A. & Kling, Catherine L., 1997. "Performance of Nested Logit Models when Welfare Estimation Is the Goal (The)," Staff General Research Papers 1480, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    16. Joseph Cooper, 1993. "A bioeconomic model for estimating the optimal level of deer and tag sales," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 3(6), pages 563-579, December.
    17. Joseph A. Herriges & Catherine L. Kling, 1997. "The Performance of Nested Logit Models When Welfare Estimation Is the Goal," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(3), pages 792-802.
    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:kap:enreec:v:19:y:2001:i:2:p:131-147. 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: (Guenther Eichhorn)

    or (Christopher F. Baum)

    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.