IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/toueco/v15y2009i1p215-242.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Working Lands and Winter Tourists in the Rocky Mountain West: A Travel Cost, Contingent Behaviour and Input–Output Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Adam Orens

    (BBC Research & Consulting, 3773 Cherry Creek North Drive, Suite 850, Denver, CO 80209, USA)

  • Andrew Seidl

    (Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1172, USA)

Abstract

Using a contingent behaviour survey approach informed by revealed travel cost data, this study explores the connection between private land use decisions and the quality and quantity of the tourism experience in Gunnison, Colorado, USA. The authors ask winter tourists about their expenditure patterns and other features of their visit. They then describe the process of agricultural land conversion to residential or commercial development and ask tourists whether they would change the duration of their visit were farms and ranches converted to second homes and tourism-related businesses. The authors infer the direct expected economic impact of private land conversion on the winter tourism industry in Gunnison County. They then use tourists' stated expenditure patterns and reported change in visitation to derive the total, direct, indirect and induced impact of private land use change on the local economy through winter tourism visitation using a county level input–output analysis. The analysis also captures the extent to which tourists view private and public lands as providing complementary versus substitute goods and services, a potential issue of concern for county planners across high natural amenity and mountainous regions where public lands play a dominant role.

Suggested Citation

  • Adam Orens & Andrew Seidl, 2009. "Working Lands and Winter Tourists in the Rocky Mountain West: A Travel Cost, Contingent Behaviour and Input–Output Analysis," Tourism Economics, , vol. 15(1), pages 215-242, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:toueco:v:15:y:2009:i:1:p:215-242
    DOI: 10.5367/000000009787536708
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5367/000000009787536708
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5367/000000009787536708?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bergstrom, John C. & Cordell, H. Ken & Watson, Alan E. & Ashley, Gregory A., 1990. "Economic Impacts of State Parks on State Economies in the South," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 69-77, December.
    2. Adamowicz, Wiktor & Swait, Joffre & Boxall, Peter & Louviere, Jordan & Williams, Michael, 1997. "Perceptions versus Objective Measures of Environmental Quality in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Models of Environmental Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 65-84, January.
    3. 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, May.
    4. Donald B. K. English, 2000. "Calculating Confidence Intervals for Regional Economic Impacts of Recreation by Bootstrapping Visitor Expenditures," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(3), pages 523-539, August.
    5. M. Henry Robison, 1997. "Community input-output models for rural area analysis with an example from central Idaho," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 31(3), pages 325-351.
    6. Loomis, John B., 1997. "Panel Estimators To Combine Revealed And Stated Preference Dichotomous Choice Data," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(2), pages 1-13, December.
    7. Ricardo Gazel & R. Schwer, 1997. "Beyond Rock and Roll: The Economic Impact of the Grateful Dead on a Local Economy," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 21(1), pages 41-55, March.
    8. W. David Eberle & F. Gregory Hayden, 1991. "Critique of Contingent Valuation and Travel Cost Methods for Valuing Natural Resources and Ecosystems," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 649-687, September.
    9. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May.
    10. Charles Hamel & Hans T. Geier & Mark Herrmann & Keith R. Criddle & S. Todd Lee, 2002. "Linking sportfishing trip attributes, participation decisions, and regional economic impacts in Lower and Central Cook Inlet, Alaska," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 36(2), pages 247-264.
    11. Rigoberto A. Lopez & Farhed A. Shah & Marilyn A. Altobello, 1994. "Amenity Benefits and the Optimal Allocation of Land," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(1), pages 53-62.
    12. 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.
    13. Weiler, Stephan & Loomis, John & Richardson, Robby & Shwiff, Stephanie, 2002. "Driving Regional Economic Models with a Statistical Model: Hypothesis Testing for Economic Impact Analysis," The Review of Regional Studies, Southern Regional Science Association, vol. 32(1), pages 97-111, Winter/Sp.
    14. John R. McKean & Donn M. Johnson & Richard G. Walsh, 1995. "Valuing Time in Travel Cost Demand Analysis: An Empirical Investigation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 71(1), pages 96-105.
    15. 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.
    16. Trudy Ann Cameron*, 1987. "Valuing Public Goods Using Referendum Data: Estimation Assuming A Logistic Error Distribution," UCLA Economics Working Papers 430, UCLA Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Putu Liza Kusuma Mustika & Natalie Stoeckl & Marina Farr, 2016. "The potential implications of environmental deterioration on business and non-business visitor expenditures in a natural setting," Tourism Economics, , vol. 22(3), pages 484-504, June.
    2. Eric Beckman & Mark Traynor, 2019. "Utilizing trade market analysis to identify the economic impact of a multiday special event in Miami Beach, Florida," Tourism Economics, , vol. 25(2), pages 253-273, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John C. Whitehead & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & George L. Van Houtven & Brett R. Gelso, 2008. "Combining Revealed And Stated Preference Data To Estimate The Nonmarket Value Of Ecological Services: An Assessment Of The State Of The Science," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 872-908, December.
    2. Daigee Shaw & Yu-Lan Chien & Yih-Ming Lin, 1999. "Alternative approach to combining revealed and stated preference data: evaluating water quality of a river system in Taipei," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 2(2), pages 97-112, June.
    3. Azevedo, Christopher Dean, 1999. "Linking revealed and stated preference data in recreation demand modeling," ISU General Staff Papers 1999010108000013438, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Chang Seung & Daniel Lew, 2013. "Accounting for variation in exogenous shocks in economic impact modeling," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 51(3), pages 711-730, December.
    5. Lienhoop, Nele & Ansmann, Till, 2011. "Valuing water level changes in reservoirs using two stated preference approaches: An exploration of validity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1250-1258, May.
    6. Daigee Shaw & Yu-Lan Chien & Yih-Ming Lin, 1999. "Alternative approach to combining revealed and stated preference data: evaluating water quality of a river system in Taipei," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 2(2), pages 97-112, June.
    7. Chin†Huang Huang, 2017. "Estimating the environmental effects and recreational benefits of cultivated flower land for environmental quality improvement in Taiwan," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 29-39, January.
    8. Whitehead, John C. & Haab, Timothy C. & Huang, Ju-Chin, 2000. "Measuring recreation benefits of quality improvements with revealed and stated behavior data," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 339-354, October.
    9. Hocheol Jeon & Joseph A. Herriges, 2017. "Combining Revealed Preference Data with Stated Preference Data: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(4), pages 1053-1086, December.
    10. Earnhart, Dietrich, 2002. "Combining Revealed and Stated Data to Examine Housing Decisions Using Discrete Choice Analysis," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 143-169, January.
    11. Luís Cruz & Paula Simões & Eduardo Barata, 2014. "Combining Observed and Contingent Travel Behaviour: The Best of Both Worlds?," Notas Económicas, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra, issue 40, pages 7-25, December.
    12. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    13. Cheng, Li & Lupi, Frank, 2016. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Water Quality Changes to Great Lakes Beaches," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235746, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Boxall, Peter C. & Englin, Jeffrey & Adamowicz, Wiktor L., 2003. "Valuing aboriginal artifacts: a combined revealed-stated preference approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 213-230, March.
    15. Birol, Ekin & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2008. "Choice Experiments Informing Environmental Policy:A European Perspective," MPRA Paper 38232, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Dietrich Earnhart, 2004. "Time is Money: Improved Valuation of Time and Transportation Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(2), pages 159-190, October.
    17. Mathews, Leah Greden, 1999. "Estimating Water Quality Benefits By Combining Revealed And Stated Preference Methods: An Application In The Minnesota River," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21621, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    18. Landry, Craig E. & Liu, Haiyong, 2009. "A semi-parametric estimator for revealed and stated preference data--An application to recreational beach visitation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 205-218, March.
    19. Michael P. McGonagle & Stephen K. Swallow, 2005. "Open Space and Public Access: A Contingent Choice Application to Coastal Preservation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(4).
    20. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2006. "Discrete Choice Survey Experiments: A Comparison Using Flexible Models," RFF Working Paper Series dp-05-60, Resources for the Future.

    Corrections

    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:sae:toueco:v:15:y:2009:i:1:p:215-242. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.