IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

The tourist recreational demand for coastal forests: Do forests really matter?


  • Bénédicte Rulleau

    (Laboratoire REEDS, Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, Bergerie nationale, Bâtiment Aile sud, Parc du Château, 78120 Rambouillet, France ; Cemagref, unité ADER ; GREThA, UMR 5113 CNRS/Université Montesquieu-Bordeaux IV, France)

  • Jeoffrey Dehez

    (Cemagref, unité ADER, Cestas, France)

  • Patrick Point

    (GREThA, UMR 5113 CNRS/Université Montesquieu-Bordeaux IV, Pessac, France)


This paper explores the possible impact of the combination of forest and non-forest settings on recreation values. We extend the traditional contingent valuation method by introducing seven dichotomous choice occasions. To answer each valuation question, each respondent is asked to choose between a policy scheme and the status quo. Each scheme is composed of various programmes while each programme is linked to the recreational quality of one natural area. An extra distance is used as a proxy of the bid. The results show that respondents distinguish between schemes according to the number of programmes included. Nevertheless, a “substitution effect” occurs when all programmes are supposed to be implemented. Individual WTP ranges from €6.51 for the forest alone (e.g. 55.35 extra kilometres per group-vehicle) to €18.11 (e.g. 153.9 extra kilometres per group-vehicle) for the complete scheme. Our results stress the fact that recreation in forests must not be isolated from other natural areas. From a more general point of view, valuation based on multi-attribute approaches must be favoured on “multi-environment” sites.

Suggested Citation

  • Bénédicte Rulleau & Jeoffrey Dehez & Patrick Point, 2011. "The tourist recreational demand for coastal forests: Do forests really matter?," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 92(3), pages 291-310.
  • Handle: RePEc:rae:jourae:v:92:y:2011:i:3:p:291-310

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Whitmarsh, David & Northen, James & Jaffry, Shabbar, 1999. "Recreational benefits of coastal protection: a case study," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4-5), pages 453-463, July.
    2. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(8), pages 827-840.
    3. Randall, Alan & Hoehn, John P., 1996. "Embedding in Market Demand Systems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 369-380, May.
    4. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 1988. "A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 355-379, September.
    5. Mbolatiana RAMBONILAZA (ADER CEMAGREF) & Patrick POINT (GREThA) & Jeanne DACHARY-BERNARD (ADER CEMAGREF), 2007. "Stability of the WTP measurements with successive use of choice experiments method and multiple programmes method," Cahiers du GREThA 2007-12, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée.
    6. Jeffrey Englin & Trudy Cameron, 1996. "Augmenting travel cost models with contingent behavior data," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(2), pages 133-147, March.
    7. Christie, Michael & Hanley, Nick & Hynes, Stephen, 2007. "Valuing enhancements to forest recreation using choice experiment and contingent behaviour methods," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2-3), pages 75-102, August.
    8. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    9. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    10. Englin Jeffrey & Shonkwiler J. S., 1995. "Modeling Recreation Demand in the Presence of Unobservable Travel Costs: Toward a Travel Price Model," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 368-377, November.
    11. R. Craig Layman & John R. Boyce & Keith R. Criddle, 1996. "Economic Valuation of the Chinook Salmon Sport Fishery of the Gulkana River, Alaska, under Current and Alternate Management Plans," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(1), pages 113-128.
    12. Larson, Douglas M. & Lew, Daniel K., 2005. "Measuring the utility of ancillary travel: revealed preferences in recreation site demand and trips taken," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(2-3), pages 237-255.
    13. Donkers, A.C.D. & Melenberg, B., 2002. "Testing predictive performance of binary choice models," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI 2002-01, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
    14. Cameron, Trudy Ann & James, Michelle D, 1987. "Efficient Estimation Methods for "Closed-ended' Contingent Valuation Surveys," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(2), pages 269-276, May.
    15. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Gary Koop, 2002. "Modelling Recreation Demand Using Choice Experiments: Climbing in Scotland," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(3), pages 449-466, July.
    16. Hoehn John P. & Loomis John B., 1993. "Substitution Effects in the Valuation of Multiple Environmental Programs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 56-75, July.
    17. Roberto Martinez-Espineira & Joe Amoako-Tuffour, 2005. "Recreation Demand Analysis under Truncation, Overdispersion, and Endogenous Stratification: An Application to Gros Morne National Park," Econometrics 0511007, EconWPA.
    18. Mbolatiana Rambonilaza & Patrick Point & Jeanne Dachary-Bernard, 2007. "Stability of the WTP Measurements with Successive Use of Choice Experiments Method and Multiple Programmes Method," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 117(5), pages 719-735.
    19. Font, Antoni Riera, 2000. "Mass Tourism and the Demand for Protected Natural Areas: A Travel Cost Approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 97-116, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. repec:irf:wpaper:000 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Carole Ropars-Collet & Mélody Leplat & Philippe Le Goffe & Marie Lesueur, 2015. "La pêche professionnelle est-elle un facteur d’attractivité récréative sur le littoral ?," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 66(4), pages 729-754.
    3. Carole Ropars–Collet & Mélody Leplat & Philippe Le Goffe & Marie Lesueur, 2015. "Commercial Fishery as an Asset for Recreational Demand on the Coastline: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in France, United Kingdom and Belgium," 2015 EAFE (European Association of Fisheries Economists) Conference Papers 009, Nisea.

    More about this item


    coastal forests; economic valuation; multi-attribute approach; contingent valuation method; outdoor recreation; tourism;

    JEL classification:

    • D60 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - General
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects


    Access and download statistics


    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:rae:jourae:v:92:y:2011:i:3:p:291-310. 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: (Nathalie Saux-Nogues). General contact details of provider: .

    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.