Testing Benefits Transfer of Forest Recreation Values over a Twenty-Year Time Horizon
We conduct a functional benefit transfer over 20 years of total willingness to pay based on carborne forest recreation in 52 forests, using a mixed logit specification of a random utility model and geographic information systems to allow heterogeneous preferences across the population and for heterogeneity over space. Results show that preferences for some forest attributes, such as species diversity and age, as well as transport mode have changed significantly over the period. Updating the transfer model with present total demand for recreation improves the error margins by an average of 282%. Average errors of the best transfer model remain 25%.
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.:
- Hellerstein, Daniel & Feather, Peter, 1997.
"Calibrating Benefit Function Transfer to Assess the Conservation Reserve Program,"
25357, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Peter Feather & Daniel Hellerstein, 1997. "Calibrating Benefit Function Transfer to Assess the Conservation Reserve Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(1), pages 151-162.
- Parsons George R. & Kealy Mary Jo, 1995. "A Demand Theory for Number of Trips in a Random Utility Model of Recreation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 357-367, November.
- John B. Loomis, 1989. "Test-Retest Reliability of the Contingent Valuation Method: A Comparison of General Population and Visitor Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 71(1), pages 76-84.
- Yoshiaki Kaoru & V. Kerry Smith & Jin Long Liu, 1995. "Using Random Utility Models to Estimate the Recreational Value of Estuarine Resources," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(1), pages 141-151.
- M. K. Haener & P. C. Boxall & W. L. Adamowicz & D. H. Kuhnke, 2004. "Aggregation Bias in Recreation Site Choice Models: Resolving the Resolution Problem," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(4).
- Sébastien Dessus & David O’Connor, 1999. "Climate Policy Without Tears: CGE-Based Ancillary Benefits Estimates for Chile," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 156, OECD Publishing.
- Feather Peter & Hellerstein Daniel & Tomasi Theodore, 1995. "A Discrete-Count Model of Recreational Demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 214-227, September.
- Michael D. Creel & John B. Loomis, 1990. "Theoretical and Empirical Advantages of Truncated Count Data Estimators for Analysis of Deer Hunting in California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(2), pages 434-441.
- Hausman, Jerry A. & Leonard, Gregory K. & McFadden, Daniel, 1995. "A utility-consistent, combined discrete choice and count data model Assessing recreational use losses due to natural resource damage," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 1-30, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:83:y:2007:i:3:p:412-440. 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: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.