IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Recreation as a Spatial Good: Distance Effects on Changes in Recreation Visitation and Benefits

  • Richardson, Robert B.

    (MI State U)

  • Loomis, John

    (CO State U)

  • Weiler, Stephan

    (CO State U)

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.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Southern Regional Science Association in its journal Review of Regional Studies.

Volume (Year): 36 (2006)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 362-80

in new window

Handle: RePEc:rre:publsh:v:36:y:2006:i:3:p:362-80
Contact details of provider: Web page:

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. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  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. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  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. 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.
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: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 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.