IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nig/wpaper/0113.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Governing Recreational Activities in Ireland: a partnership approach to sustainable tourism

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas van Rensburg
  • Edel Doherty

    () (Department of Economics, National University of Ireland, Galway)

  • Catherine Murray

Abstract

In Ireland increased public access for recreation presents challenges to policy makers concerned with tourism and rural development. Recreation activities such as mountaineering, walking and cycling can contribute to the regeneration of marginalised rural areas and enhance residents' quality of life. However, de facto access to common and private farm land also generates conflicts between recreationists, landowners and government authorities. Using common pool resource theory we describe the formation and development of two partnerships in the mountains of Mourne (Northern Ireland) and the Wicklow uplands (Republic of Ireland). Our findings indicate that partnerships can reduce recreational conflicts involving complex property rights and diverse stakeholders by re-positioning incentives yet avoid changes in land ownership and property rights. Community based contracts and access agreements between the state, partnerships and landowners has lead to the adoption of new rules by walking associations, regulation enforcement and public-private investment in trail development.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas van Rensburg & Edel Doherty & Catherine Murray, 2006. "Governing Recreational Activities in Ireland: a partnership approach to sustainable tourism," Working Papers 113, National University of Ireland Galway, Department of Economics, revised 2006.
  • Handle: RePEc:nig:wpaper:0113
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.economics.nuig.ie/resrch/paper.php?pid=120
    File Function: First version, 2006
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.economics.nuig.ie/resrch/paper.php?pid=120
    File Function: Revised version, 2006
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sen, Amartya, 1970. "Interpersonal Aggregation and Partial Comparability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 38(3), pages 393-409, May.
    2. Richard Barrett & Maurice Salles, 2006. "Social Choice With Fuzzy Preferences," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 200615, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
    3. Rajat Deb & Manabendra Dasgupta, 1996. "Transitivity and fuzzy preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 13(3), pages 305-318.
    4. Asley Piggins & Maurice Salles, 2007. "Instances of Indeterminacy," Post-Print halshs-00337772, HAL.
    5. Basu, Kaushik, 1984. "Fuzzy revealed preference theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 212-227, April.
    6. Dutta, Bhaskan, 1987. "Fuzzy preferences and social choice," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 215-229, June.
    7. Perote-Pena, Juan & Piggins, Ashley, 2007. "Strategy-proof fuzzy aggregation rules," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 564-580, June.
    8. Barrett, C.R. & Pattanaik, P.K. & Salles, M., 1990. "Rationality and Aggregation of Preferences in an Ordinally Fuzzy Framework," Institut des Mathématiques Economiques – Document de travail de l’I.M.E. (1974-1993) 9006, Institut des Mathématiques Economiques. LATEC, Laboratoire d'Analyse et des Techniques EConomiques, CNRS, Université de Bourgogne.
    9. Dutta, Bhaskar & Panda, Santosh C. & Pattanaik, Prasanta K., 1986. "Exact choice and fuzzy preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 53-68, February.
    10. Duddy, Conal & Piggins, Ashley, 2013. "Many-valued judgment aggregation: Characterizing the possibility/impossibility boundary," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 793-805.
    11. Maurice Salles, 2005. "Social Choice," Post-Print halshs-00337075, HAL.
    12. Conal Duddy & Juan Perote-Peña & Ashley Piggins, 2010. "Manipulating an aggregation rule under ordinally fuzzy preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 34(3), pages 411-428, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General

    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:nig:wpaper:0113. 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: (Srinivas Raghavendra). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/deucgie.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.