IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/nzar11/115514.html

Valuing Trout Angling Benefits of Water Quality Improvements while Accounting for Unobserved Lake Characteristics: An Application to the Rotorua Lakes

Author

Listed:
  • Mkwara, Lena Asimenye
  • Marsh, Dan

Abstract

Trout angling is one of the most popular water-based recreational activities in the Rotorua Lakes. Despite the high demand for trout angling and other recreational purposes, water quality in some of these lakes has been declining over the past decades and initiatives to try to restore the lakes are underway. To compliment these efforts, this study uses the travel cost random utility models to explore how changes in water quality would impact upon angler’s choice of fishing destinations. The welfare impacts due to water quality changes and possible lake closures are also explored. These findings highlight the importance of discrete choice random utility models as a policy decision making tool for recreational-based natural resource managers in New Zealand. Additionally, this study represents one of the unique cases in travel cost random utility applications that accounts fully for unobserved site effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Mkwara, Lena Asimenye & Marsh, Dan, 2011. "Valuing Trout Angling Benefits of Water Quality Improvements while Accounting for Unobserved Lake Characteristics: An Application to the Rotorua Lakes," 2011 Conference, August 25-26, 2011, Nelson, New Zealand 115514, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:nzar11:115514
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.115514
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/115514/files/Mkwara%20and%20Marsh%202.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.115514?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. Hanemann, W. Michael, 1982. "Applied Welfare Analysis with Qualitative Response Models," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt7982f0k8, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    2. Kenneth E. Train, 1998. "Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences over People," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 230-239.
    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.
    4. John A. Downing, 2009. "Valuing Water Quality as a Function of Water Quality Measures," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 106-123.
    5. Needelman, Michael S. & Kealy, Mary Jo, 1995. "Recreational Swimming Benefits Of New Hampshire Lake Water Quality Policies: An Application Of A Repeated Discrete Choice Model," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 24(01), pages 1-10, April.
    6. Lin, Pei-Chien & Adams, Richard M. & Berrens, Robert P., 1996. "Welfare Effects Of Fishery Policies: Native American Treaty Rights And Recreational Salmon Fishing," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 21(2), pages 1-14, December.
    7. Murdock, Jennifer, 2006. "Handling unobserved site characteristics in random utility models of recreation demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 1-25, January.
    8. Edward R. Morey & Robert D. Rowe & Michael Watson, 1993. "A Repeated Nested-Logit Model of Atlantic Salmon Fishing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(3), pages 578-592.
    9. Kaoru, Yoshiaki, 1995. "Measuring marine recreation benefits of water quality improvements by the nested random utility model," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 119-136, August.
    10. Needelman, Michael S. & Kealy, Mary Jo, 1995. "Recreational Swimming Benefits of New Hampshire Lake Water Quality Policies: An Application of a Repeated Discrete Choice Model," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(1), pages 78-87, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Hanemann, W. Michael, 1982. "Applied Welfare Analysis with Qualitative Response Models," CUDARE Working Papers 7160, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    13. Paul M. Jakus & Dimitrios Dadakas & J. Mark Fly, 1998. "Fish Consumption Advisories: Incorporating Angler-Specific Knowledge, Habits, and Catch Rates in a Site Choice Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1019-1024.
    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. Hynes, Stephen & O’Reilly, Paul & Corless, Rebecca, 2015. "An on-site versus a household survey approach to modelling the demand for recreational angling: Do welfare estimates differ?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 136-145.

    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. Bujosa Bestard, Angel & Font, Antoni Riera, 2009. "Environmental diversity in recreational choice modelling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2743-2750, September.
    2. Tudor, Lynne G. & Besedin, Elena Y. & Fisher, Michael & Smith, Stuart, 1999. "Economic Analysis Of Environmental Regulations: Application Of The Random Utility Model To Recreational Benefit Assessment For The Mp&M Effluent Guideline," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21630, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Needelman, Michael S. & Kealy, Mary Jo, 1995. "Recreational Swimming Benefits Of New Hampshire Lake Water Quality Policies: An Application Of A Repeated Discrete Choice Model," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 24(01), pages 1-10, April.
    4. Peter Schuhmann & Kurt Schwabe, 2004. "An Analysis of Congestion Measures and Heterogeneous Angler Preferences in a Random Utility Model of Recreational Fishing," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(4), pages 429-450, April.
    5. Angel Bujosa & Antoni Riera & Robert Hicks, 2010. "Combining Discrete and Continuous Representations of Preference Heterogeneity: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(4), pages 477-493, December.
    6. Newbold, Stephen C. & Massey, D. Matthew, 2010. "Recreation demand estimation and valuation in spatially connected systems," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 222-240, April.
    7. Sandström, Mikael, 1996. "Recreational Benefits from Improved Water Quality: A Random Utility Model of Swedish Seaside Recreation," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 121, Stockholm School of Economics.
    8. Bujosa Bestard, Angel & Riera Font, Antoni, 2010. "Estimating the aggregate value of forest recreation in a regional context," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 205-216, August.
    9. Jara-Díaz, Sergio & Rosales-Salas, Jorge, 2017. "Beyond transport time: A review of time use modeling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 209-230.
    10. Domanski, Adam, 2009. "Estimating Mixed Logit Recreation Demand Models With Large Choice Sets," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49413, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Richard Batley & Thijs Dekker, 2019. "The Intuition Behind Income Effects of Price Changes in Discrete Choice Models, and a Simple Method for Measuring the Compensating Variation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(1), pages 337-366, September.
    12. Heng Z. Chen & Frank Lupi & John P. Hoehn, 1999. "An Empirical Assessment of Multinomial Probit and Logit Models for Recreation Demand," Chapters, in: Joseph A. Herriges & Catherine L. Kling (ed.), Valuing Recreation and the Environment, chapter 5, pages 141-162, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Juutinen, Artti & Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ovaskainen, Ville, 2014. "Estimating the benefits of recreation-oriented management in state-owned commercial forests in Finland: A choice experiment," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 396-412.
    14. Ortega, David L. & Waldman, Kurt B. & Richardson, Robert B. & Clay, Daniel C. & Snapp, Sieglinde, 2016. "Sustainable Intensification and Farmer Preferences for Crop System Attributes: Evidence from Malawi’s Central and Southern Regions," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 139-151.
    15. Hicks, Robert L. & Holland, Daniel S. & Kuriyama, Peter T. & Schnier, Kurt E., 2020. "Choice sets for spatial discrete choice models in data rich environments," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    16. Stafford, Tess M., 2018. "Accounting for outside options in discrete choice models: An application to commercial fishing effort," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 159-179.
    17. Deely, J. & Hynes, S. & Curtis, J., 2019. "Are objective data a suitable replacement for subjective data in site choice analysis?," Working Papers 309602, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    18. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    19. Richard C. Bishop & Kevin J. Boyle, 2019. "Reliability and Validity in Nonmarket Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(2), pages 559-582, February.
    20. Babatunde Abidoye & Joseph Herriges, 2012. "Model Uncertainty in Characterizing Recreation Demand," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(2), pages 251-277, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:nzar11:115514. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nzareea.html .

    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.