IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/uwp/landec/v79y2003i3p440-454.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reconciling Models of Recreational Route and Site Choices

Author

Listed:
  • Kathleen P. Bell
  • Ivar E. Strand

Abstract

When employing travel cost models, the unit cost of the essential input (travel) in the household’ s production of a recreation experience is central to obtaining the preference structure for the recreational good. However, little attention has been given to the choice of the route although the route defines the monetary and time costs used to compute travel costs. Conventional wisdom considers time and money costs in determining the cost per mile in the estimation of site choices but does not use both in determining the route choices and mileages. This paper investigates whether models of recreational site and route choices can be reconciled.

Suggested Citation

  • Kathleen P. Bell & Ivar E. Strand, 2003. "Reconciling Models of Recreational Route and Site Choices," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(3), pages 440-454.
    • Handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:79:y:2003:i:3:p:440-454
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://le.uwpress.org/cgi/reprint/79/3/440
    Download Restriction: A subscripton is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert L. Hicks & Ivar E. Strand, 2000. "The Extent of Information: Its Relevance for Random Utility Models," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(3), pages 374-385.
    2. Smith, V. Kerry, 1997. "Time and the Valuation of Environmental Resources," Discussion Papers 10485, Resources for the Future.
    3. Bockstael, Nancy E. & Strand, Ivar E., Jr., 1985. "Distributional Issues And Nonmarket Benefit Measurement," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 10(2), pages 1-8, December.
    4. 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.
    5. Parsons, George R. & Wilson, Aaron J., 1997. "Incidental And Joint Consumption In Recreation Demand," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 1-6, April.
    6. Catherine L. Kling & Cynthia J. Thomson, 1996. "The Implications of Model Specification for Welfare Estimation in Nested Logit Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(1), pages 103-114.
    7. 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.
    8. Douglas M. Larson & Sabina L. Shaikh, 2001. "Empirical Specification Requirements for Two-Constraint Models of Recreation Choice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(2), pages 428-440.
    9. 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.
    10. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    11. Jeffrey Englin & David Lambert, 1995. "Measuring angling quality in count data models of recreational fishing," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(4), pages 389-399, December.
    12. Alan Randall, 1994. "Difficulty with the Travel Cost Method," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(1), pages 88-96.
    13. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-719, November.
    14. George R. Parsons & Mary Jo Kealy, 1992. "Randomly Drawn Opportunity Sets in a Random Utility Model of Lake Recreation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(1), pages 93-106.
    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. Bujosa, Angel & Riera, Antoni & Torres, Catalina M., 2015. "Valuing tourism demand attributes to guide climate change adaptation measures efficiently: The case of the Spanish domestic travel market," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 233-239.
    2. Anderson, Lee G. & Parsons, George R., 2004. "Review of Valuation Studies for Coastal and Ocean Resources in Latin America and the Caribbean," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 4486, Inter-American Development Bank.
    3. Phaneuf, Daniel J. & Smith, V. Kerry, 2006. "Recreation Demand Models," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 671-761, Elsevier.

    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. Phaneuf, Daniel J. & Smith, V. Kerry, 2006. "Recreation Demand Models," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 671-761, Elsevier.
    2. Concu, Giovanni B., 2007. "Investigating distance effects on environmental values: a choice modelling approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(2), pages 1-20.
    3. Haab, Timothy C. & Hicks, Robert L., 1997. "Accounting for Choice Set Endogeneity in Random Utility Models of Recreation Demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 127-147, October.
    4. von Haefen, Roger H., 2003. "Incorporating observed choice into the construction of welfare measures from random utility models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 145-165, March.
    5. Ophelia Amo & Wisdom Akpalu & Daniel K. Twerefou & Godfred A. Bokpin, 2022. "Estimating the Economic Value of Health Walk on the Accra-Aburi Mountains Walkway in Ghana: An Individual Travel Cost Approach," International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI), vol. 9(1), pages 75-85, January.
    6. Lew, Daniel K. & Larson, Douglas M., 2005. "Accounting for stochastic shadow values of time in discrete-choice recreation demand models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 341-361, September.
    7. Akbar Marvasti, 2010. "A welfare estimation of beach recreation with aggregate data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(3), pages 291-296.
    8. Eom, Young-Sook & Larson, Douglas M., 2006. "Improving environmental valuation estimates through consistent use of revealed and stated preference information," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 501-516, July.
    9. Christopher Azevedo & John R. Crooker, 2008. "Alternative Approaches to Incorporating the Opportunity Cost of Time in Recreation Demand Models," Working Papers 0803, University of Central Missouri, Department of Economics & Finance, revised May 2008.
    10. 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.
    11. Hicks, Robert L. & Schnier, Kurt E., 2010. "Spatial regulations and endogenous consideration sets in fisheries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 117-134, April.
    12. 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.
    13. Anna Bartczak & Jeffrey Englin & Arwin Pang, 2012. "When are Forest Visits Valued the Most? An Analysis of the Seasonal Demand for Forest Recreation in Poland," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 52(2), pages 249-264, June.
    14. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Marek Giergiczny & Jakub Kronenberg & Jeffrey Englin, 2019. "The Individual Travel Cost Method with Consumer-Specific Values of Travel Time Savings," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 961-984, November.
    15. Danielle Hagerty & Klaus Moeltner, 2005. "Specification of Driving Costs in Models of Recreation Demand," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(1).
    16. Phaneuf, Daniel James, 1997. "Generalized corner solution models in recreation demand," ISU General Staff Papers 1997010108000013022, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    17. Crooker, John R., 2007. "Nonparametric Bounds on Welfare with Measurement Error in Prices: Techniques for Non-Market Resource Valuation," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 239-252, October.
    18. Larson, Douglas M. & Shaikh, Sabina L., 1999. "Empirical Specification Requirements For Two-Constraint Models Of Recreation Demand," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21629, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Vondolia, Godwin K. & Navrud, Ståle, 2019. "Are non-monetary payment modes more uncertain for stated preference elicitation in developing countries?," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 73-87.
    20. Vivien Foster & Susana Mourato, 2003. "Elicitation Format and Sensitivity to Scope," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(2), pages 141-160, February.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources

    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:uwp:landec:v:79:y:2003:i:3:p:440-454. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://le.uwpress.org/ .

    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.