IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/106188.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Travel Cost Method Considering Trip-day Counts as Integers

Author

Listed:
  • Kono, Tatsuhito
  • Yoshida, Jun

Abstract

The Travel Cost Method (TCM) is a typical benefit measurement method, using the fact that people substitute the benefit of visiting some sites for their travel cost. However, in the case of tourist sites, travelers do not choose the number of days spent in a tourist city as continuous numbers but integer numbers. We investigate how a bias could arise from ignoring integer numbers of nights in TCM. We derive the formula of what factors constitute the bias. Next, we numerically show that when measuring benefits of improving quality at sites, the maximum bias could be around 20%.

Suggested Citation

  • Kono, Tatsuhito & Yoshida, Jun, 2020. "Travel Cost Method Considering Trip-day Counts as Integers," MPRA Paper 106188, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Feb 2021.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:106188
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/106188/1/MPRA_paper_106188.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anton Nahman & Dan Rigby, 2008. "Valuing Blue Flag Status And Estuarine Water Quality In Margate, South Africa1," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 76(4), pages 721-737, December.
    2. Loomis, John B. & Yorizane, Shizuka & Larson, Douglas M., 2000. "Testing Significance Of Multi-Destination And Multi-Purpose Trip Effects In A Travel Cost Method Demand Model For Whale Watching Trips," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 29(2), pages 1-9, October.
    3. Craig E. Landry & Kenneth E. McConnell, 2007. "Hedonic Onsight Cost Model of Recreation Demand," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(2), pages 253-267.
    4. Ian M. Dobbs, 1993. "Individual Travel Cost Method: Estimation and Benefit Assessment with a Discrete and Possibly Grouped Dependent Variable," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(1), pages 84-94.
    5. Shrestha, Ram K. & Seidl, Andrew F. & Moraes, Andre S., 2002. "Value of recreational fishing in the Brazilian Pantanal: a travel cost analysis using count data models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 289-299, August.
    6. Kuriyama, Koichi & Michael Hanemann, W. & Hilger, James R., 2010. "A latent segmentation approach to a Kuhn-Tucker model: An application to recreation demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 209-220, November.
    7. Douglas M. Larson, 1993. "Joint Recreation Choices and Implied Values of Time," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 69(3), pages 270-286.
    8. K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), 2005. "Handbook of Environmental Economics," Handbook of Environmental Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 3, number 3.
    9. K. E. McConnell, 1992. "On-Site Time in the Demand for Recreation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(4), pages 918-925.
    10. Berman, Matthew D. & Kim, Hong Jin, 1999. "Endogenous On-Site Time In The Recreation Demand Model," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21616, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Alan Randall, 1994. "Difficulty with the Travel Cost Method," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(1), pages 88-96.
    12. Chia-Yu Yeh & Timothy Haab & Brent Sohngen, 2006. "Modeling Multiple-Objective Recreation Trips with Choices Over Trip Duration and Alternative Sites," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(2), pages 189-209, June.
    13. Matthew D. Berman & Hong Jin Kim, 1999. "Endogenous On-Site Time in the Recreation Demand Model," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(4), pages 603-619.
    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. 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.
    2. Hellström, Jörgen & Nordström, Jonas, 2005. "Demand and Welfare Effects in Recreational Travel Models: A Bivariate Count Data Approach," Umeå Economic Studies 648, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    3. Hellström, Jörgen & Nordström, Jonas, 2012. "Demand and welfare effects in recreational travel models: Accounting for substitution between number of trips and days to stay," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 446-456.
    4. Prayaga, Prabha, 2017. "Estimating the value of beach recreation for locals in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, Australia," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 9-18.
    5. Roberto Martinez-Espineira & Joe Amoako-Tuffour, 2008. "Multi-destination and multi-purpose trip effects in the analysis of the demand for trips to a remote recreational site," EERI Research Paper Series EERI_RP_2008_19, Economics and Econometrics Research Institute (EERI), Brussels.
    6. Jörgen Hellström & Jonas Nordström, 2008. "A count data model with endogenous household specific censoring: the number of nights to stay," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 179-192, August.
    7. Jörgen Hellström, 2006. "A bivariate count data model for household tourism demand," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(2), pages 213-226.
    8. Simões, Paula & Barata, Eduardo & Cruz, Luís, 2013. "Joint estimation using revealed and stated preference data: An application using a national forest," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 249-266.
    9. Paula Simões & Luís Cruz & Eduardo Barata, 2012. "Non-market Recreational Value of a National Forest: Survey Design and Results," GEMF Working Papers 2012-09, GEMF, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra.
    10. Lew, Daniel K., 1998. "Some Implications Of The Two-Constraint Joint Recreational Choice Demand Model," 1998 Annual meeting, August 2-5, Salt Lake City, UT 20937, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Richard Melstrom, 2014. "Valuing historic battlefields: an application of the travel cost method to three American Civil War battlefields," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 38(3), pages 223-236, August.
    12. Larson, Douglas M. & Lew, Daniel K., 2000. "Valuing Time Onsite and in Travel in Recreation Demand Models," Western Region Archives 321674, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    13. Hocheol Jeon & Joseph A. Herriges, 2017. "Combining Revealed Preference Data with Stated Preference Data: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(4), pages 1053-1086, December.
    14. Lew, Daniel K. & Larson, Douglas M., 2005. "Accounting for stochastic shadow values of time in discrete-choice recreation demand models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 341-361, September.
    15. John C. Whitehead & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & George L. Van Houtven & Brett R. Gelso, 2008. "Combining Revealed And Stated Preference Data To Estimate The Nonmarket Value Of Ecological Services: An Assessment Of The State Of The Science," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 872-908, December.
    16. John C. Whitehead & Daniel K. Lew, 2020. "Estimating recreation benefits through joint estimation of revealed and stated preference discrete choice data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 2009-2029, April.
    17. Halkos, George, 2012. "The use of contingent valuation in assessing marine and coastal ecosystems’ water quality: A review," MPRA Paper 42183, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Cetin, Nuket Ipek & Bourget, Gulhan & Tezer, Azime, 2021. "Travel-cost method for assessing the monetary value of recreational services in the Ömerli Catchment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    19. Snyder, Lori D. & Stavins, Robert N. & Wagner, Alexander F., 2003. "Private Options to Use Public Goods: Exploiting Revealed Preferences to Estimate Environmental Benefits," Discussion Papers 10908, Resources for the Future.
    20. Bayliss, Julian & Schaafsma, Marije & Balmford, Andrew & Burgess, Neil D. & Green, Jonathan M.H. & Madoffe, Seif S. & Okayasu, Sana & Peh, Kelvin S.-H. & Platts, Philip J. & Yu, Douglas W., 2014. "The current and future value of nature-based tourism in the Eastern Arc Mountains of Tanzania," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 75-83.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Project Evaluation; Travel cost method; Integer property;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth

    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:pra:mprapa:106188. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.

    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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.