IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rza/wpaper/239.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The recreational value of beaches in the Nelson Mandela Bay area, South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Deborah E. Lee
  • Mario du Preez
  • Stephen G. Hosking

Abstract

Using beach visitation data collected via the administration of a questionnaire to 226 respondents, this paper estimates a random utility model of beach recreation. The relative value of selected attributes of beaches is estimated, and the recreational values of lost access to four Blue Flag beaches in the Nelson Mandela Bay area, namely Kings beach, […]

Suggested Citation

  • Deborah E. Lee & Mario du Preez & Stephen G. Hosking, 2011. "The recreational value of beaches in the Nelson Mandela Bay area, South Africa," Working Papers 239, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    • Handle: RePEc:rza:wpaper:239
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econrsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/wp239.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert L. Hicks & Ivar E. Strand, 2000. "The Extent of Information: Its Relevance for Random Utility Models," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(3), pages 374-385.
    2. Nick Hanley & Clive L. Spash, 1993. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 205.
    3. 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.
    4. Danielle Hagerty & Klaus Moeltner, 2005. "Specification of Driving Costs in Models of Recreation Demand," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(1).
    5. Rakhal Sarker & Yves Surry, 1998. "Economic value of big game hunting : the case of moose hunting in Ontario [Valeur économique de chasse de gros gibier : le cas de la chasse à l'orignal en Ontario]," Post-Print hal-02691470, HAL.
    6. Peter P. Caulkins & Richard C. Bishop & Nicolaas W. Bouwes, 1986. "The Travel Cost Model for Lake Recreation: A Comparison of Two Methods for Incorporating Site Quality and Substitution Effects," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(2), pages 291-297.
    7. 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.
    8. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    9. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May.
    10. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    11. Frank A. Ward & Diana Beal, 2000. "Valuing Nature with Travel Cost Models," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1768.
    12. W. Douglass Shaw, 1992. "Searching for the Opportunity Cost of an Individual's Time," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(1), pages 107-115.
    13. Roberto Martinez-Espineira & Joe Amoako-Tuffour, 2005. "Recreation Demand Analysis under Truncation, Overdispersion, and Endogenous Stratification: An Application to Gros Morne National Park," Econometrics 0511007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. K. E. McConnell, 1999. "Household Labor Market Choices and the Demand for Recreation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(3), pages 466-477.
    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. Oghenekaro Nelson Odume & Blessing Nonye Onyima & Chika Felicitas Nnadozie & Gift Ochonogor Omovoh & Thandi Mmachaka & Blessing Odafe Omovoh & Jude Edafe Uku & Frank Chukwuzuoke Akamagwuna & Francis O, 2022. "Governance and Institutional Drivers of Ecological Degradation in Urban River Ecosystems: Insights from Case Studies in African Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-14, October.
    2. Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2012. "Determinants of willingness to pay for coastal zone quality improvement," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 391-399.

    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. Amoako-Tuffour, Joe & Martınez-Espineira, Roberto, 2008. "Leisure and the Opportunity Cost of Travel Time in Recreation Demand Analysis: A Re-Examination," MPRA Paper 8573, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Isabel Mendes & Isabel Proença, 2009. "Measuring the Social Recreation Per-Day Net Benefit of Wildlife Amenities of a National Park: A Count-Data Travel Cost Approach," Working Papers Department of Economics 2009/35, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    3. Helen Scarborough & Jeff Bennett, 2012. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and Distributional Preferences," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14376.
    4. 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.
    5. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    6. Birol, Ekin & Villalba, Eric Rayn & Smale, Melinda, 2009. "Farmer preferences for milpa diversity and genetically modified maize in Mexico: a latent class approach," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 521-540, August.
    7. Schreiner, Julia A., 2014. "Farmers’ Valuation of Incentives to Produce GMO-free Milk: A Discrete Choice Experiment," 2014 International European Forum, February 17-21, 2014, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 199373, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    8. Gebreegziabher, Z. & Mekonnen, A. & Beyene, A.D. & Hagos, F., 2018. "Valuation of access to irrigation water in rural Ethiopia: application of choice experiment and contingent valuation methods," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Jeff Bennett & Ekin Birol, 2010. "Introduction: The Roles and Significance of Choice Experiments in Developing Country Contexts," Chapters, in: Jeff Bennett & Ekin Birol (ed.), Choice Experiments in Developing Countries, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Francis Oremo & Richard Mulwa & Nicholas Oguge, 2021. "Sustainable water access and willingness of smallholder irrigators to pay for on-farm water storage systems in Tsavo sub-catchment, Kenya," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 1371-1391, February.
    11. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    12. Travisi, Chiara M. & Nijkamp, Peter, 2004. "Are Italians Willing to Pay for Agricultural Environmental Safety? A Stated Choice Approach," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24988, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Teferi, Ermias Tesfaye & Kassie, Girma T. & Pe, Mario Enrico & Fadda, Carlo, 2020. "Are farmers willing to pay for climate related traits of wheat? Evidence from rural parts of Ethiopia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    14. Lizin, Sebastien & Van Passel, Steven & Schreurs, Eloi, 2015. "Farmres' Perceived Cost of Land Use restrictions: A Simulated Purchasing Decision Using Dscrete Choice Experiments," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212054, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Zander, Kerstin K. & Signorello, Giovanni & De Salvo, Maria & Gandini, Gustavo & Drucker, Adam G., 2013. "Assessing the total economic value of threatened livestock breeds in Italy: Implications for conservation policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 219-229.
    16. Birol, Ekin & Kontoleon, Andreas & Smale, Melinda, 2005. "Using A Choice Experiment To Estimate The Demand Of Hungarian Farmers For Food Security And Agrobiodiversity During Economic Transition," Environmental Economy and Policy Research Discussion Papers 31937, University of Cambridge, Department of Land Economy.
    17. Hicks, Robert L., 2002. "A Comparison Of Stated And Revealed Preference Methods For Fisheries Management," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19853, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    18. Sara Kaffashi & Mad Nasir Shamsudin & Alias Radam & Khalid Abdul Rahim & Mohd Rusli Yacob, 2013. "Non-users’ trade-off between natural scenery, water quality, ecological functions and biodiversity conservation: a way to preserve wetlands," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 251-260, June.
    19. Bakti Hasan-Basri & Mohd Zaini Abd Karim & Normizan Bakar, 2015. "Willingness To Pay For Recreational Attributes Of Public Parks: A Choice Experiment Approach," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 60(05), pages 1-18, December.
    20. Hjelmgren, Jonas & Anell, Anders, 2007. "Population preferences and choice of primary care models: A discrete choice experiment in Sweden," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(2-3), pages 314-322, October.

    More about this item

    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:rza:wpaper:239. 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: Maggi Sigg (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ersacza.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.