IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uqseee/125209.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ecotourism Experiences Promoting Conservation and Changing Economic Values: The Case of Mon Repos Turtles

Author

Listed:
  • Tisdell, Clement A.

Abstract

Each year during the turtle watching season, Mon Repos turtle rookery in Queensland attracts many ecotourists interested in seeing sea turtles nesting or hatching. As part of their visit, visitors are able to learn about the biology of and threats to marine turtles. A sample of visitors were surveyed in order to determine whether their experiences at Mon Repos changed their conservation attitudes and their intended behaviours for protecting sea turtles. Using these results, the role of environmental education in changing their attitudes and intended behaviours is analysed and is found to be an important influence. Nevertheless, it is argued that other factors (such as emotional effects) are also important (sometimes the most important ones) in altering conservation behaviours and attitudes. This is less well recognised in the economics and ecotourism literature than it should be. The results from the survey summarised here are based on statements from respondents obtained soon after their ecotouristic experience at Mon Repos. There is therefore, likely to be a gap between the intended behaviours stated by respondents and their realised behaviours. Various types of hypothetical bias may be present, and a drop-off or decay effect is also likely to occur which also involves a bias. This effect creates difficulties for the application of contingent valuation methodology as well as from other forms of stated preferences elicitation of economic values. Simple mathematical models can be used to predict how individuals are likely to change their conservation behaviours as their information about the characteristics of environmental goods (in this case wildlife species) is altered. However, allowing for the conservation consequences of emotional experiences seems to be more challenging. In concluding, it is also pointed out that the conservation consequences of ecotourism do not depend solely on its generation of favourable behaviours among ecotourists. Furthermore, for reasons identified, ecotourism has serious limitations as a means for conserving wild biodiversity and needs to be supplemented by other means.

Suggested Citation

  • Tisdell, Clement A., 2012. "Ecotourism Experiences Promoting Conservation and Changing Economic Values: The Case of Mon Repos Turtles," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 125209, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:uqseee:125209
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.125209
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/125209/files/WP178.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.125209?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. Kristin M. Jakobsson & Andrew K. Dragun, 1996. "Contingent Valuation and Endangered Species," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1120.
    2. Clem Tisdell, 2007. "Knowledge and the valuation of public goods and experiential commodities: information provision and acquisition," Global Business and Economics Review, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(2/3), pages 170-182.
    3. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    4. Ballantyne, Roy & Packer, Jan & Falk, John, 2011. "Visitors’ learning for environmental sustainability: Testing short- and long-term impacts of wildlife tourism experiences using structural equation modelling," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1243-1252.
    5. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    6. Leida Mercado & James Lassoie, 2002. "Assessing Tourists' Preferences for Recreational and Environmental Management Programs Central to the Sustainable Development of a Tourism Area in the Dominican Republic," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 253-278, September.
    7. Clem Tisdell & Clevo Wilson, 2012. "Nature-based Tourism and Conservation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13773.
    8. Clem Tisdell & Clevo Wilson, 2005. "Perceived Impacts of Ecotourism on Environmental Learning and Conservation: Turtle Watching as a Case Study," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 291-302, September.
    9. K. K. Lancaster, 2010. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Levine's Working Paper Archive 1385, David K. Levine.
    10. Tisdell, Clem & Wilson, Clevo & Swarna Nantha, Hemanath, 2008. "Contingent valuation as a dynamic process," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1443-1458, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Clem Tisdell & Clevo Wilson, 2012. "Nature-based Tourism and Conservation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13773.
    2. Kularatne, Thamarasi & Wilson, Clevo & Lee, Boon & Hoang, Viet-Ngu, 2021. "Tourists’ before and after experience valuations: A unique choice experiment with policy implications for the nature-based tourism industry," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 529-543.
    3. Anderson, Simon P. & Foros, Øystein & Kind, Hans Jarle, 2012. "Product quality, competition, and multi-purchasing," Discussion Papers 2012/9, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    4. Veneziani, Mario & Sckokai, Paolo & Moro, Daniele, 2012. "Consumers’ willingness to pay for a functional food," 2012 First Congress, June 4-5, 2012, Trento, Italy 124101, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    5. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Olynk, Nicole J., 2011. "Modeling heterogeneity in consumer preferences for select food safety attributes in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 318-324, April.
    6. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Schüle, Christopher & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2023. "The motivational drivers behind consumer preferences for regional electricity – Results of a choice experiment in Southern Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    7. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Katrak, Homi, 1998. "Economic analyses of Industrial Research Institutes in developing countries: the Indian experience," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 337-347, August.
    9. Ondřej Vojáček, 2011. "K pojetí preferencí v ekonomickém myšlení [Preference Dilemma in Economics]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2011(3), pages 345-358.
    10. Sagebiel, Julian & Müller, Jakob R. & Rommel, Jens, 2013. "Are Consumers Willing to Pay More for Electricity from Cooperatives? Results from an Online Choice Experiment in Germany," MPRA Paper 52385, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Amir, Shmuel, 1995. "Welfare maximization in economic theory: Another viewpoint," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 359-376, August.
    12. Tisdell, Clement A., 2007. "Valuing the Otago Peninsula: The Economic Benefits of Conservation," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 55104, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    13. Timothy K.M. Beatty, 2007. "Recovering the Shadow Value of Nutrients," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(1), pages 52-62.
    14. Knittel Christopher R. & Stango Victor, 2008. "Incompatibility, Product Attributes and Consumer Welfare: Evidence from ATMs," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-42, January.
    15. Ballco, Petjon & Gracia, Azucena, 2020. "Do market prices correspond with consumer demands? Combining market valuation and consumer utility for extra virgin olive oil quality attributes in a traditional producing country," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    16. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    17. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    18. Zhang, Xiaohui & Zhao, Xueyan & Harris, Anthony, 2009. "Chronic diseases and labour force participation in Australia," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 91-108, January.
    19. Guggenberger, Patrik & Kaul, Ashok & Kolmar, Martin, 2002. "Efficiency properties of labor taxation in a spatial model of restricted labor mobility," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 447-473, July.
    20. Mamine, Fateh & Fares, M'hand & Minviel, Jean Joseph, 2020. "Contract Design for Adoption of Agrienvironmental Practices: A Meta-analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:uqseee:125209. 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/decuqau.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.