IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/toueco/v15y2009i2p339-365.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recreational Demand Functions for Different Categories of Beach Visitor

Author

Listed:
  • Silva Marzetti Dall'Aste Brandolini

    (Department of Economics, University of Bologna, Piazza Scaravilli 2, 40126 Bologna, Italy)

Abstract

This paper addresses the estimation of the recreational use value of a beach for different categories of beach visitor and its determinants. According to economic theory, it is generally expected that income and the number of beach visits affect the value of a recreational visit. The recreational value should increase as income increases and should decrease as the number of beach visits increases. Nevertheless, anomalies such as the Veblen effect are admitted. The data used for this research were obtained from a questionnaire carried out in Lido di Dante, a coastal tourist resort in Italy. The contingent valuation method (CVM) in the value of enjoyment (VOE) version was applied. Beach visitors were asked to give a monetary value to informal recreational beach use (such as sunbathing, walking and swimming) in three different scenarios: status quo, erosion and artificial defence. Beach services are modelled in private goods terms, because each individual may make a different number of visits, and different categories of beach visitor (all beach visitors, day visitors and residents, and tourists) are described by presenting their respective use value functions. It is shown that household income explains the recreational beach value of all visitor categories considered, while the number of beach days explains only that of day visitors and residents. The coefficients of these two independent variables do not have the expected sign, thus suggesting that the preferences of beach visitors at Lido di Dante belong to the category of anomalies in the economic theory of demand.

Suggested Citation

  • Silva Marzetti Dall'Aste Brandolini, 2009. "Recreational Demand Functions for Different Categories of Beach Visitor," Tourism Economics, , vol. 15(2), pages 339-365, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:toueco:v:15:y:2009:i:2:p:339-365
    DOI: 10.5367/000000009788254331
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5367/000000009788254331
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5367/000000009788254331?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. W. Michael Hanemann, 1989. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Response Data: Reply," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 71(4), pages 1057-1061.
    2. John W. Duffield & David A. Patterson, 1991. "Inference and Optimal Design for a Welfare Measure in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(2), pages 225-239.
    3. Kenneth E. McConnell & Ivar Strand, 1981. "Measuring the Cost of Time in Recreation Demand Analysis: An Application to Sportfishing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 63(1), pages 153-156.
    4. Anna Alberini & Paolo Rosato & Alberto Longo & Valentina Zanatta, 2005. "Information and Willingness to Pay in a Contingent Valuation Study: The Value of S. Erasmo in the Lagoon of Venice," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(2), pages 155-175.
    5. Navrud, StAle & Mungatana, E. D., 1994. "Environmental valuation in developing countries: The recreational value of wildlife viewing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 135-151, November.
    6. Whitehead John C. & Blomquist Glenn C. & Hoban Thomas J. & Clifford William B., 1995. "Assessing the Validity and Reliability of Contingent Values: A Comparison of On-Site Users, Off-Site Users, and Non-users," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 238-251, September.
    7. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, 2002. "Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2427, December.
    8. Bishop, Richard C. & Heberlein, Thomas A., 1979. "Measuring Values Of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," 1979 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, Pullman, Washington 277818, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    9. Kevin J. Boyle & Richard C. Bishop, 1988. "Welfare Measurements Using Contingent Valuation: A Comparison of Techniques," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(1), pages 20-28.
    10. Robert Mendelsohn & John Hof & George Peterson & Reed Johnson, 1992. "Measuring Recreation Values with Multiple Destination Trips," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(4), pages 926-933.
    11. Barton, David N., 2002. "The transferability of benefit transfer: contingent valuation of water quality improvements in Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 147-164, August.
    12. Richard C. Bishop & Thomas A. Heberlein, 1979. "Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 61(5), pages 926-930.
    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. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John & Pascoe, Sean, 2017. "Assessing recreational benefits as an economic indicator for the Gladstone Harbour Report Card," 2017 Conference (61st), February 7-10, 2017, Brisbane, Australia 258681, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Fernanda Oliveira & Pedro Pintassilgo & Patrícia Pinto & Isabel Mendes & João Albino Silva, 2017. "Segmenting visitors based on willingness to pay for recreational benefits," Tourism Economics, , vol. 23(3), pages 680-691, May.
    3. Baulcomb, Corinne & Böhnke-Henrichs, Anne, 2014. "A Review of the Marine Economic Valuation Literature 1975 – 2011: Classifying Existing Studies by Service Type, Value Type, and Valuation Methodology," Working Papers 190935, Scotland's Rural College (formerly Scottish Agricultural College), Land Economy & Environment Research Group.

    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. Jin, Jianjun & Wang, Zhishi & Liu, Xuemin, 2008. "Valuing black-faced spoonbill conservation in Macao: A policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 328-335, December.
    2. Guo, Xiurui & Liu, Haifeng & Mao, Xianqiang & Jin, Jianjun & Chen, Dongsheng & Cheng, Shuiyuan, 2014. "Willingness to pay for renewable electricity: A contingent valuation study in Beijing, China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 340-347.
    3. Langford, Ian H. & Bateman, Ian J., 1996. "Elicitation and truncation effects in contingent valuation studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 265-267, December.
    4. Choong-Ki Lee & James W. Mjelde & Tae-Kyun Kim, 2013. "Estimating the Effects of Different Admission Fees on Revenues for a Mega-Event Using a Contingent Valuation Method," Tourism Economics, , vol. 19(1), pages 147-159, February.
    5. Poe, Gregory L. & Lossin, Eric K. & Welsh, Michael P., 1992. "A Convolutions Approach to Measuring the Differences in Benefit Estimates from Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Studies," Staff Papers 200545, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    6. Ik-Chang Choi & Hyun No Kim & Hio-Jung Shin & John Tenhunen & Trung Thanh Nguyen, 2017. "Economic Valuation of the Aquatic Biodiversity Conservation in South Korea: Correcting for the Endogeneity Bias in Contingent Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, June.
    7. W. George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa & Susan M. Chilton & T. McCallion, 2001. "Parametric and Non‐Parametric Estimates of Willingness to Pay for Forest Recreation in Northern Ireland: A Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Study with Follow‐Ups," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 104-122, January.
    8. Fabrizio Carlevaro & C. Schlesser & M. E. Binet & M. Paul, 2007. "Econometric Modeling and Analysis of Residential Water Demand Based on Unbalanced Panel Data," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 8(4), pages 81-102.
    9. Rolfe, John & Dyack, Brenda, 2010. "Testing for convergent validity between travel cost and contingent valuation estimates of recreation values in the Coorong, Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(4), pages 1-17.
    10. Lee, Choong-Ki & W. Mjelde, James, 2007. "Valuation of ecotourism resources using a contingent valuation method: The case of the Korean DMZ," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 511-520, August.
    11. Ngouhouo Poufoun, Jonas & Abildtrup, Jens & Sonwa, Dénis Jean & Delacote, Philippe, 2016. "The value of endangered forest elephants to local communities in a transboundary conservation landscape," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 70-86.
    12. Nikola Jovanoski, 2015. "Estimating the Value of Preserving the Doubs," IRENE Working Papers 15-02, IRENE Institute of Economic Research.
    13. Scarpa, Riccardo & Chilton, Susan M. & Hutchinson, W. George & Buongiorno, Joseph, 2000. "Valuing the recreational benefits from the creation of nature reserves in Irish forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-250, May.
    14. Hanemann, W. Michael & Kanninen, Barbara, 1996. "The Statistical Analysis Of Discrete-Response Cv Data," CUDARE Working Papers 25022, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    15. Won Seok Lee, 2020. "A Study on the Value of Preserving a Parasitic Volcanic Sieve as a Tourism Good for Sustainable Management: Using the Contingent Valuation Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-12, April.
    16. Casellas, Karina & Lema, Daniel & Brescia, Víctor & Berges, Miriam, 2012. "Disposición a pagar y adopción de innovaciones genéticas: el caso del arroz resistente a herbicidas," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1895, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    17. Casellas, Karina & Lema, Daniel & Brescia, Víctor & Berges, Miriam, 2012. "Disposición a pagar por una nueva tecnología genética: el caso del arroz resistente a herbicidas," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1673, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    18. Cooper, Joseph C., 1995. "The Application of Nonmarket Valuation Techniques to Agricultural Issues," Staff Reports 333359, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    19. Chin-Huang Huang & Chiung-Hsia Wang, 2015. "Estimating the Total Economic Value of Cultivated Flower Land in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-19, April.
    20. Kelly Giraud & John Loomis & Joseph Cooper, 2001. "A Comparison of Willingness to Pay Estimation Techniques From Referendum Questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(4), pages 331-346, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:2:p:339-365. 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.