IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20140049.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cultural Heritage and the Attractiveness of Cities: Evidence from Recreation Trips

Author

Listed:
  • Ruben van Loon

    (VU University Amsterdam)

  • Tom Gosens

    (VU University Amsterdam)

  • Jan Rouwendal

    (VU University Amsterdam)

Abstract

This discussion paper resulted in a publication in the 'Journal of Cultural Economics' . Many cities are trying to attract tourists by investing in urban amenities. Cultural heritage is an important example and substantial investments are needed to keep ancient inner cities and characteristic monumental buildings in good shape. The costs of these policies are usually clear, the benefits are often much more difficult to assess. This paper attempts to fill part of this gap by studying the destination choices of urban recreation trips that have urban recreation as the main travel motive. We estimate a discrete choice model for destination choice that takes into account the potential importance of unobserved characteristics. The model allows us to compute the marginal willingness to travel for destinations offering more cultural heritage, which we measure as the area of the inner city that has a protected status because of the cultural heritage that is present there.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruben van Loon & Tom Gosens & Jan Rouwendal, 2014. "Cultural Heritage and the Attractiveness of Cities: Evidence from Recreation Trips," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-049/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20140049
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/14049.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edward L. Glaeser, Jed Kolko, and Albert Saiz, 2001. "Consumer city," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 27-50, January.
    2. Yang, Chih-Hai & Lin, Hui-Lin & Han, Chia-Chun, 2010. "Analysis of international tourist arrivals in China: The role of World Heritage Sites," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 827-837.
    3. Murdock, Jennifer, 2006. "Handling unobserved site characteristics in random utility models of recreation demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 1-25, January.
    4. Rinaldo Brau & A. Lanza & F. Pigliaru, 2003. "How fast are tourism countries growing? The cross country evidence," Working Paper CRENoS 200309, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    5. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    6. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, September.
    7. Mark van Duijn & Jan Rouwendal, 2013. "Cultural heritage and the location choice of Dutch households in a residential sorting model," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 473-500, May.
    8. Douglas Noonan & Douglas Krupka, 2010. "Determinants of historic and cultural landmark designation: why we preserve what we preserve," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 34(1), pages 1-26, February.
    9. Francesco Pigliaru & Alessandro Lanza, 2003. "How fast are the tourism countries growing? The international evidence, 1980-95," ERSA conference papers ersa03p234, European Regional Science Association.
    10. Jolanta Dziembowska-Kowalska & Rolf H. Funck, 2000. "Cultural activities as a location factor in European competition between regions: Concepts and some evidence," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 34(1), pages 1-12.
    11. Jan Rouwendal & Jaap Boter, 2009. "Assessing the value of museums with a combined discrete choice/count data model," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(11), pages 1417-1436.
    12. H Oppewal & H J P Timmermans & J J Louviere, 1997. "Modelling the Effects of Shopping Centre Size and Store Variety on Consumer Choice Behaviour," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 29(6), pages 1073-1090, June.
    13. Patrick Bayer & Robert McMillan & Kim Rueben, 2004. "An Equilibrium Model of Sorting in an Urban Housing Market," NBER Working Papers 10865, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    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. Enrico Bertacchini & Massimiliano Nuccio & Alessandra Durio, 2021. "Proximity tourism and cultural amenities: Evidence from a regional museum card," Tourism Economics, , vol. 27(1), pages 187-204, February.
    2. Douglas S. Noonan & Ilde Rizzo, 2017. "Economics of cultural tourism: issues and perspectives," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 41(2), pages 95-107, May.

    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. van Duijn, Mark & Rouwendal, Jan, 2021. "Sorting based on urban heritage and income: Evidence from the Amsterdam metropolitan area," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    2. Or Levkovich & Jan Rouwendal, 2014. "Location Choices of highly Educated Foreign Workers: the Importance of Urban Amenities," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-093/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    3. Zhang, Junfu & Zheng, Liang, 2015. "Are people willing to pay for less segregation? Evidence from U.S. internal migration," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 97-112.
    4. Abidoye, Babatunde Oluwakayode, 2010. "Bayesian inference in modeling recreation demand," ISU General Staff Papers 201001010800002496, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Mulalic, Ismir & Rouwendal, Jan, 2020. "Does improving public transport decrease car ownership? Evidence from a residential sorting model for the Copenhagen metropolitan area," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    6. Ulrich B. Morawetz & H. Allen Klaiber, 2022. "Does housing policy impact income sorting near urban amenities? Evidence from Vienna, Austria," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 69(2), pages 411-454, October.
    7. Teulings, Coen N. & Ossokina, Ioulia V. & de Groot, Henri L.F., 2018. "Land use, worker heterogeneity and welfare benefits of public goods," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 67-82.
    8. von Haefen, Roger H. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 2008. "Identifying demand parameters in the presence of unobservables: A combined revealed and stated preference approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 19-32, July.
    9. Mark van Duijn & Jan Rouwendal, 2013. "Cultural heritage and the location choice of Dutch households in a residential sorting model," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 473-500, May.
    10. Tovar, Jorge, 2012. "Consumers’ Welfare and Trade Liberalization: Evidence from the Car Industry in Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 808-820.
    11. Pereira, Pedro & Ribeiro, Tiago, 2011. "The impact on broadband access to the Internet of the dual ownership of telephone and cable networks," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 283-293, March.
    12. Patrick Bayer & Fernando Ferreira & Robert McMillan, 2007. "A Unified Framework for Measuring Preferences for Schools and Neighborhoods," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(4), pages 588-638, August.
    13. Mattia Girotti & Richard Meade, 2017. "U.S. Savings Banks' Demutualization and Depositor Welfare," Working Papers 2017-08, Auckland University of Technology, Department of Economics.
    14. Rachel Griffith & Lars Nesheim & Martin O'Connell, 2018. "Income effects and the welfare consequences of tax in differentiated product oligopoly," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), pages 305-341, March.
    15. Jan De Loecker & Paul T. Scott, 2016. "Estimating market power Evidence from the US Brewing Industry," NBER Working Papers 22957, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Babatunde O. Abidoye & Joseph A. Herriges & Justin L. Tobias, 2012. "Controlling for Observed and Unobserved Site Characteristics in RUM Models of Recreation Demand," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1070-1093.
    17. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.
    18. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2007. "Discrete Choice Models With Multiple Unobserved Choice Characteristics," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(4), pages 1159-1192, November.
    19. Satoshi Nakano & Kazuhiko Nishimura, 2013. "Welfare gain from quality and price development in the Japan’s LCD TV market," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 889-908, September.
    20. Federico Ciliberto & GianCarlo Moschini & Edward D. Perry, 2019. "Valuing product innovation: genetically engineered varieties in US corn and soybeans," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 50(3), pages 615-644, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cultural heritage; recreation; city marketing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C31 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models; Quantile Regressions; Social Interaction Models
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • R12 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Size and Spatial Distributions of Regional Economic Activity; Interregional Trade (economic geography)
    • R22 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Household Analysis - - - Other Demand
    • L83 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Sports; Gambling; Restaurants; Recreation; Tourism

    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:tin:wpaper:20140049. 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: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.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.