Recreation as a Spatial Good: Distance Effects on Changes in Recreation Visitation and Benefits
The effects of travel distance on visitation and associated recreation benefits are tested for a large national park. Visitor responses to a survey depicting various natural resource scenarios at Rocky Mountain National Park were used to estimate the effects of distance traveled on nature-based tourism behavior and benefits. Distance was a significant determinant in both the visitation and contingent valuation models. Long-distance visitors were more stable in their visitation patterns in the face of natural resource changes. Marginal recreational benefits per trip increased with distance but at a decreasing rate. However, in-state visitors accrued higher annual benefits because of greater trip frequency. The relative importance of visitor types can help private and public decision-makers better respond to different visitor needs. The findings also provide a unique perspective on consumer spatial tradeoffs and the national value of recreational resources.
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.:
- George R. Parsons & A. Brett Hauber, 1998. "Spatial Boundaries and Choice Set Definition in a Random Utility Model of Recreation Demand," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(1), pages 32-48.
- Kenneth E. McConnell, 1977. "Congestion and Willingness to Pay: A Study of Beach Use," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 53(2), pages 185-195.
- Lisa C. Chase & David R. Lee & William D. Schulze & Deborah J. Anderson, 1998. "Ecotourism Demand and Differential Pricing of National Park Access in Costa Rica," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(4), pages 466-482.
- Stephan Weiler & Andrew Seidl, 2004. "What's in a Name? Extracting Econometric Drivers to Assess The Impact of National Park Designation," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 245-262.
- 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.
- Deyak, Timothy A. & Smith, V. Kerry, 1978. "Congestion and participation in outdoor recreation: A household production function approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 63-80, March.
- Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
- 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.
- Loomis, John B. & Gonzalez-Caban, Armando & Englin, Jeffrey E., 2001. "Testing For Differential Effects Of Forest Fires On Hiking And Mountain Biking Demand And Benefits," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(02), December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rre:publsh:v:36:y:2006:i:3:p:362-80. 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: (Mark L. Burkey)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.