User fees, equity and the benefits of public outdoor recreation services
The paper addresses the question of who benefits from public recreation areas. Employing a set of survey data from users and nonusers of state-owned recreation and conservation areas in Finland, we derive two measures for distributional analysis. The first, the income elasticity of willingness to pay for recreation services, indicates that public provision of recreation benefits lower-income groups more than higher-income groups. The second, a welfare measure including efficiency loss, reveals ambiguous impacts depending on the level of the fee implemented. Low fee levels decrease recreation visits among lower-income users, whereas high fees reduce the welfare level of higher-income users in particular.
|Date of creation:||25 Jun 2007|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany|
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- S. Illeris & G. Akehurst, 2001. "Introduction," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 1-4, January.
- Huhtala, Anni, 2004. "What price recreation in Finland? – A contingent valuation study of non-market benefits of public outdoor recreation areas," MPRA Paper 24602, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Espey, Molly, 2005. "Implementation of Recreation Fees by the U.S. Forest Service: 1996-2002," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19389, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- Bergstrom, Theodore C & Goodman, Robert P, 1973. "Private Demands for Public Goods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(3), pages 280-296, June.
- Bengt Kristrom & Pere Riera, 1996. "Is the income elasticity of environmental improvements less than one?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 45-55, January.
- Cosslett, Stephen R, 1983. "Distribution-Free Maximum Likelihood Estimator of the Binary Choice Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(3), pages 765-782, May.
- Mattias Boman & Göran Bostedt & Bengt Kriström, 1999. "Obtaining Welfare Bounds in Discrete-Response Valuation Studies: A Non-Parametric Approach," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(2), pages 284-294.
- Hanemann, W Michael, 1991. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 635-647, June.
- Udo Ebert, 2003. "Environmental Goods and the Distribution of Income," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(4), pages 435-459, August.
- Flores, Nicholas E. & Carson, Richard T., 1997.
"The Relationship between the Income Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay,"
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,
Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 287-295, July.
- Flores, Nicholas E. & Carson, Richard T., 1995. "The Relationship Between the Income Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay," 1995 Conference (39th), February 14-16, 1995, Perth, Australia 148795, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
- Besley, Timothy & Coate, Stephen, 1991.
"Public Provision of Private Goods and the Redistribution of Income,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 979-984, September.
- Besley, T. & Coate, S., 1989. "Public Provision Of Private Goods And The Redistribution Of Income," Papers 36, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Discussion Paper.
- Stina Hökby & Tore Söderqvist, 2003. "Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay for Environmental Services in Sweden," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(3), pages 361-383, November.
- Johansson,Per-Olov, 1987. "The Economic Theory and Measurement of Environmental Benefits," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521348102, December.
- Teasley, R. Jeff & Bergstrom, John C. & Cordell, H. Ken, 1994. "Estimating Revenue-Capture Potential Associated With Public Area Recreation," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 19(01), July.
- Horowitz, John K. & McConnell, K. E., 2003. "Willingness to accept, willingness to pay and the income effect," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(4), pages 537-545, August.
- Schlapfer, Felix, 2006. "Survey protocol and income effects in the contingent valuation of public goods: A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 415-429, May.
- Borcherding, Thomas E & Deacon, Robert T, 1972. "The Demand for the Services of Non-Federal Governments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(5), pages 891-901, December.
- Cameron, Trudy Ann & Huppert, Daniel D., 1989. "OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values with payment card interval data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 230-246, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:24603. 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: (Joachim Winter)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.