IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/esr/wpaper/wp190.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing the Travel Cost Method and the Contingent Valuation Method ? An application of Convergent Validity Theory to the Recreational Value of Irish Forests

Author

Listed:
  • Karen Mayor

    (Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI))

  • Susan Scott

    (Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI))

  • Richard S.J. Tol

    (Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI))

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to check the monetary value of the recreational use of Irish forests using two different valuation methods on the one dataset ? the Travel Cost Method and the Contingent Valuation Technique ? and in doing so test convergent validity, i.e. whether they are consistent with each other. It is found that convergence cannot be established with this data. The Willingness-to-Pay for entrance responses are stationary and tend to cluster around IR£1 per adult equivalent per trip. The TCM results of consumer surplus, which should be the same as WTP, are more variable depending on which sample is analysed and range between IR£2.38 and IR£5.95 per adult equivalent per trip. No correlation between these two variables was found. It seems that there are problems in getting people to state their true WTP. This is possibly due to a misinterpretation of the question by respondents as well as a tendency to revert to a common number. It is also likely that respondents used their WTP answers to make a political statement against the expansion of forestland using agricultural land. Finally, forests in Ireland are regarded as public goods and consequently there exists a stance among users that access to them should be free of charge, which might explain the large number of protest bids.

Suggested Citation

  • Karen Mayor & Susan Scott & Richard S.J. Tol, 2007. "Comparing the Travel Cost Method and the Contingent Valuation Method ? An application of Convergent Validity Theory to the Recreational Value of Irish Forests," Papers WP190, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    • Handle: RePEc:esr:wpaper:wp190
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.esri.ie/pubs/WP190.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2007
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ian Langford* & Areti Kontogianni & Mihalis Skourtos & Stavros Georgiou & Ian Bateman, 1998. "Multivariate Mixed Models for Open-Ended Contingent Valuation Data: Willingness To Pay For Conservation of Monk Seals," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(4), pages 443-456, December.
    2. Scarpa, Riccardo & Chilton, Susan M. & Hutchinson, W. George & Buongiorno, Joseph, 2000. "Valuing the recreational benefits from the creation of nature reserves in Irish forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-250, May.
    3. 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.
    4. John A. Curtis, 2002. "Estimating the Demand for Salmon Angling in Ireland," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 33(3), pages 319-332.
    5. Yongsik Jeon & Joseph Herriges, 2010. "Convergent Validity of Contingent Behavior Responses in Models of Recreation Demand," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 223-250, February.
    6. Stephen Hynes & Cathal Buckley & Tom van Rensburg, 2006. "Agricultural versus Recreational Activity on Marginal Farm Land: A Discrete-Choice Model of Recreational Activity on Irish Farm Commonage," Working Papers 0603, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    7. Timothy M. Swanson & Sam Johnston, 1999. "Global Environmental Problems and International Environmental Agreements," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1444.
    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. Marija Opačak & Erda Wang, 2019. "Estimating Willingness to Pay for a Future Recreational Park Atop the Current Jakuševec Landfill in Zagreb, Croatia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-16, October.
    2. Häggmark-Svensson, Tobias & Elofsson, Katarina & Engelmann, Marc & Gren, Ing-Marie, 2015. "A review of the literature on benefits, costs, and policies for wildlife management," Working Paper Series 2015:1, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department Economics.
    3. Serge Garcia & Julien Jacob, 2010. "La valeur récréative de la forêt en France : une approche par les coûts de déplacement," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 91(1), pages 43-71.
    4. David Březina & Jakub Michal & Zdeněk Adamec & Jana Burdová, 2019. "Quantification of the economic value of the recreational function of forests in the territory of Městské lesy Hradec Králové a.s," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 65(5), pages 161-170.
    5. Elizelle Juaneé Cilliers & Wim Timmermans, 2015. "An Integrative Approach to Value-Added Planning: From Community Needs to Local Authority Revenue," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 675-687, December.
    6. Whelan, Adele & McGuinness, Seamus & Barrett, Alan, 2021. "Review of International Approaches to Evaluating Rural and Community Development Investment and Supports," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number RS124.
    7. Choi, Hyunhong & Koo, Yoonmo, 2018. "Using Contingent Valuation and Numerical Methods to Determine Optimal Locations for Environmental Facilities: Public Arboretums in South Korea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 184-201.
    8. Armbrecht, John, 2014. "Use value of cultural experiences: A comparison of contingent valuation and travel cost," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 141-148.
    9. P. Hlaváčková & D. Březina, 2016. "Economic evaluation of the recreational use of forests: A case study of the Training Forest Enterprise Masaryk Forest Křtiny," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(9), pages 389-398.
    10. Polizzi, Cecilia & Simonetto, Matteo & Barausse, Alberto & Chaniotou, Ninetta & Känkänen, Riina & Keränen, Silja & Manzardo, Alessandro & Mustajärvi, Kaisa & Palmeri, Luca & Scipioni, Antonio, 2015. "Is ecosystem restoration worth the effort? The rehabilitation of a Finnish river affects recreational ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 158-169.

    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. Ojea, Elena & Loureiro, Maria L., 2011. "Identifying the scope effect on a meta-analysis of biodiversity valuation studies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 706-724, September.
    2. Nikodinoska, Natasha & Paletto, Alessandro & Pastorella, Fabio & Granvik, Madeleine & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2018. "Assessing, valuing and mapping ecosystem services at city level: The case of Uppsala (Sweden)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 411-424.
    3. Kelley, Hugh & van Rensburg, Thomas M. & Jeserich, Nadine, 2016. "Determinants of demand for recreational walking trails in Ireland," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 173-186.
    4. Stephen Hynes & Brian Cahill & Emma J. Dillon, 2007. "A Negative Binomial Discrete Choice Model of Forestry Recreation in Ireland," Working Papers 0709, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    5. Ressurreição, Adriana & Gibbons, James & Dentinho, Tomaz Ponce & Kaiser, Michel & Santos, Ricardo S. & Edwards-Jones, Gareth, 2011. "Economic valuation of species loss in the open sea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 729-739, February.
    6. Carlos Jurado-Rivas & Marcelino Sánchez-Rivero, 2019. "Willingness to Pay for More Sustainable Tourism Destinations in World Heritage Cities: The Case of Caceres, Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-21, October.
    7. Stephen Hynes & Cathal Buckley & Tom van Rensburg, 2006. "Agricultural versus Recreational Activity on Marginal Farm Land: A Discrete-Choice Model of Recreational Activity on Irish Farm Commonage," Working Papers 0603, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    8. Luís Cruz & Paula Simões & Eduardo Barata, 2014. "Combining Observed and Contingent Travel Behaviour: The Best of Both Worlds?," Notas Económicas, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra, issue 40, pages 7-25, December.
    9. Barrio, Melina & Loureiro, Maria L., 2010. "A meta-analysis of contingent valuation forest studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1023-1030, March.
    10. Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani & Dritsas, Sophoclis, 2017. "Exploring social values for marine protected areas: The case of Mediterranean monk seal," MPRA Paper 82490, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Stephen Hynes & Cathal Buckley & Tom van Rensburg, 2007. "Recreational Pursuits on Marginal Farm Land: A Discrete-Choice Model of Irish Farm Commonage Recreation," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 38(1), pages 63-84.
    12. Halkos, George, 2012. "Assessing the economic value of protecting artificial lakes," MPRA Paper 39557, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Peter Howley & Edel Doherty & Cathal Buckley & Stephen Hynes & Tom van Rensburg & Stuart Green, 2010. "Public access to the countryside: An exploration of the costs and benefits of farmland walking trails," Working Papers 1006, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    14. 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.
    15. Cathal Buckley & Stephen Hynes & Tom van Rensburg & Edel Doherty, 2008. "Access to farmland for walking in the Republic of Ireland – The attitude of landowners," Working Papers 0814, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    16. Halkos, George, 2013. "The relationship between people’s attitude and willingness to pay for river conservation," MPRA Paper 50560, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Mikhail Miklyaev & Glenn P. Jenkins & Precious P. Adeshina, 2022. "Ex-Post Evaluation of The Algerian SWRO Desalination PPP Program," Development Discussion Papers 2022-14, JDI Executive Programs.
    18. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    19. Pamela Wicker & John C. Whitehead & Bruce K. Johnson & Daniel S. Mason, 2016. "Willingness-To-Pay For Sporting Success Of Football Bundesliga Teams," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 34(3), pages 446-462, July.
    20. Bowker, James Michael & Starbuck, C. Meghan & English, Donald B.K. & Bergstrom, John C. & Rosenberger, Randall S. & McCollum, Daniel W., 2009. "Estimating the Net Economic Value of National Forest Recreation: An Application of the National Visitor Use Monitoring Database," Faculty Series 59603, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Contingent Valuation; Travel Cost Model; Forest Recreation.;
    All these 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:esr:wpaper:wp190. 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: Sarah Burns (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esriiie.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.