IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/saeasm/34822.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Investigating the Potential of Fee-Based Recreation on Private Lands in the Lower Mississippi River Delta

Author

Listed:
  • Henderson, James E.
  • Dunn, Michael A.

Abstract

Private landowners may be willing to allow public access for fee-based wildlife-associated recreation. A survey and econometric techniques are proposed to determine what characteristics may influence the probability to decide to offer recreation, what organizational form landowners may prefer to manage and market fee-based recreation, and how liability concerns and other possible disincentives collectively influence landowners' access decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Henderson, James E. & Dunn, Michael A., 2007. "Investigating the Potential of Fee-Based Recreation on Private Lands in the Lower Mississippi River Delta," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34822, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:saeasm:34822
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.34822
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/34822/files/sp07he03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.34822?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. Mary Jo Kealy & Robert W. Turner, 1993. "A Test of the Equality of Closed-Ended and Open-Ended Contingent Valuations," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(2), pages 321-331.
    2. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    3. Carson, Richard T & Flores, Nicholas A, 2000. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt75k752s7, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    4. Bradley Jorgensen & Geoffrey Syme & Brian Bishop & Blair Nancarrow, 1999. "Protest Responses in Contingent Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(1), pages 131-150, July.
    5. Gardner, Justin G. & Eastwood, David B. & Brooker, John R. & Klingeman, William E., 2003. "Consumers' Valuation Of Disease-Resistant Nursery Stock: A Case Study Of Dogwoods," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 21(01), pages 1-14.
    6. Welsh, Michael P. & Poe, Gregory L., 1998. "Elicitation Effects in Contingent Valuation: Comparisons to a Multiple Bounded Discrete Choice Approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 170-185, September.
    7. Alan Randall, 1997. "The NOAA Panel Report: A New Beginning or the End of an Era?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1489-1494.
    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. Cathal Buckley & Stephen Hynes & Tom van Rensburg, 2008. "Comparisons between Ireland and other developed nation on the provision of public access to the countryside for walking – Are there lessons to be learned?," Working Papers 0803, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.

    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. Chan, Kai-Ying & Oerlemans, Leon A.G. & Volschenk, Jako, 2015. "On the construct validity of measures of willingness to pay for green electricity: Evidence from a South African case," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 321-328.
    2. Sælensminde, Kjartan, 2003. "Embedding effects in valuation of non-market goods," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 59-72, January.
    3. Stenger, Anne & Harou, Patrice & Navrud, Ståle, 2009. "Valuing environmental goods and services derived from the forests," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 1-14, January.
    4. Mankaï, Selim & Marchand, Sébastien & Le, Ngoc Ha, 2024. "Valuing insurance against small probability risks: A meta-analysis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    5. Franco, Daniel & Luiselli, Luca, 2013. "A procedure to analyse the strategic outliers and the multiple motivations in a contingent valuation: a case study for a concrete policy purpose," MPRA Paper 66498, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Dorte Gyrd-Hansen, 2013. "Using the Stated Preference Technique for Eliciting Valuations: The Role of the Payment Vehicle," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(10), pages 853-861, October.
    7. Paul Raschky & Reimund Schwarze & Manijeh Schwindt & Ferdinand Zahn, 2013. "Uncertainty of Governmental Relief and the Crowding out of Flood Insurance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 54(2), pages 179-200, February.
    8. Haddak, Mohamed Mouloud & Lefèvre, Marie & Havet, Nathalie, 2016. "Willingness-to-pay for road safety improvement," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-10.
    9. Collins, Alan R. & Rosenberger, Randall S., 2007. "Protest Adjustments in the Valuation of Watershed Restoration Using Payment Card Data," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-15, October.
    10. Jürgen Meyerhoff & Ulf Liebe, 2008. "Do protest responses to a contingent valuation question and a choice experiment differ?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(4), pages 433-446, April.
    11. Saelensminde, Kjartan, 2006. "Causes and consequences of lexicographic choices in stated choice studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 331-340, September.
    12. Oerlemans, Leon A.G. & Chan, Kai-Ying & Volschenk, Jako, 2016. "Willingness to pay for green electricity: A review of the contingent valuation literature and its sources of error," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 875-885.
    13. Halkos, George, 2012. "Assessing the economic value of protecting artificial lakes," MPRA Paper 39557, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Farr, Marina & Stoeckl, Natalie & Alam Beg, Rabiul, 2014. "The non-consumptive (tourism) ‘value’ of marine species in the Northern section of the Great Barrier Reef," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 89-103.
    15. Jürgen Meyerhoff & Morten Mørkbak & Søren Olsen, 2014. "A Meta-study Investigating the Sources of Protest Behaviour in Stated Preference Surveys," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(1), pages 35-57, May.
    16. Cooper, Bethany & Crase, Lin & Burton, Michael P., 2010. "Urban Water Restrictions: Attitudes and Avoidance," 2010 Conference (54th), February 10-12, 2010, Adelaide, Australia 58892, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    17. Pamela Kaval & Mavra Stithou & Riccardo Scarpa, 2007. "Social Values of Biodiversity Conservation for the Endangered Loggerhead Turtle and Monk Seal," Working Papers in Economics 07/15, University of Waikato.
    18. A. K. M. Abdullah Al-Amin & Khorshed Alam & Uttam Babu Shrestha & Masudul Haque Prodhan & Mostafa A. R. Hossain & Nahid Sattar & M. J. Hossain & Tahmina Akhter, 2021. "Ecosystems, livelihood assets and willingness to pay for wetland conservation in Bangladesh," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(12), pages 17503-17534, December.
    19. Martinez-Espineira, Roberto, 2006. "A Box-Cox Double-Hurdle model of wildlife valuation: The citizen's perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 192-208, June.
    20. Steffen Rätzel & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Der Maradona Effekt: Wie viel Wohlfahrt schafft die deutsche Nationalmannschaft?," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 7(2), pages 257-270, May.

    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:ags:saeasm:34822. 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/saeaaea.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.