IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/arerjl/31564.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role Of Expectations And Heterogeneous Preferences For Congestion In The Valuation Of Recreation Benefits

Author

Listed:
  • Michael, Jeffrey A.
  • Reiling, Stephen D.

Abstract

Studies of recreation congestion generally utilize nonmarket valuation techniques to determine the use level and entrance price that maximize aggregate recreation benefits for a specific recreation area. This paper improves upon these previous studies by relaxing the assumption of homogeneous preferences among visitors of the same recreation area and accounting for visitor expectations of congestion. The results indicate that failing to account for heterogeneous preferences for congestion by time of visit leads to overestimates of the benefits of relieving peak-time congestion, while accounting for expectations raises questions about the validity of the standard optimal use model.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael, Jeffrey A. & Reiling, Stephen D., 1997. "The Role Of Expectations And Heterogeneous Preferences For Congestion In The Valuation Of Recreation Benefits," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-8, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:arerjl:31564
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.31564
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/31564/files/26020166.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.31564?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Freeman, A. III & Haveman, Robert M., 1977. "Congestion, quality deterioration, and heterogeneous tastes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 225-232, October.
    2. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    3. McConnell, K. E., 1988. "Heterogeneous preferences for congestion," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 251-258, September.
    4. Fredric C. Menz & John K. Mullen, 1981. "Expected Encounters and Willingness to Pay for Outdoor Recreation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 57(1), pages 33-40.
    5. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 1988. "A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 355-379, September.
    6. Walsh, Richard G. & Gilliam, Lynde O., 1982. "Benefits Of Wilderness Expansion With Excess Demand For Indian Peaks," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 7(1), pages 1-12, July.
    7. Kerry Smith, V., 1981. "Congestion, travel cost recreational demand models, and benefit evaluation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 92-96, March.
    8. Kenneth E. McConnell, 1977. "Congestion and Willingness to Pay: A Study of Beach Use," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 53(2), pages 185-195.
    9. Bo Shelby, 1980. "Crowding Models for Backcountry Recreation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 56(1), pages 43-55.
    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. Timmins, Christopher & Murdock, Jennifer, 2007. "A revealed preference approach to the measurement of congestion in travel cost models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 230-249, March.
    2. de Palma, André & Lindsey, Robin, 2020. "Tradable permit schemes for congestible facilities with uncertain supply and demand," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 21(C).
    3. George Parsons & Kelley Myers, 2017. "Fat tails and truncated bids in contingent valuation: an application to an endangered shorebird species," Chapters, in: Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train (ed.), Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods, chapter 2, pages 17-42, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Christopher Timmins & Jennifer Murdock, 2006. "A Revealed Preference Approach to the Measurement of Congestion in Travel Cost Models," Working Papers tecipa-213, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    5. Kimberly Rollins & Diana Dumitras & Anita Castledine, 2008. "An Analysis of Congestion Effects Across and Within Multiple Recreation Activities," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(1), pages 95-116, March.
    6. Deborah Ellen Lee & Stephen Gerald Hosking & Mario Du Preez, 2015. "Managing Some Motorised Recreational Boating Challenges in South African Estuaries: A Case Study at the Kromme River Estuary," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 83(2), pages 286-302, June.
    7. Boxall, Peter & Rollins, Kimberly & Englin, Jeffrey, 2003. "Heterogeneous preferences for congestion during a wilderness experience," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 177-195, May.
    8. Lindsey, Robin, 2011. "State-dependent congestion pricing with reference-dependent preferences," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 1501-1526.

    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. Felipe Vásquez & Michael Hanemann, 2008. "Taste Indicators and Heterogeneous Revealed Preferences for Congestion in Recreation Demand," Working Papers 10-2008, Departamento de Economía, Universidad de Concepción.
    2. Bergland, Olvar & Kim, Seung-Woo & McLeod, Don & Romstad, Eirik, 1989. "Estimation of Optimal Congestion Levels: Deer Hunting in Western Oregon," 1989 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 2, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 270485, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    4. Boxall, Peter & Rollins, Kimberly & Englin, Jeffrey, 2003. "Heterogeneous preferences for congestion during a wilderness experience," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 177-195, May.
    5. Peter Schuhmann & Kurt Schwabe, 2004. "An Analysis of Congestion Measures and Heterogeneous Angler Preferences in a Random Utility Model of Recreational Fishing," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(4), pages 429-450, April.
    6. repec:rre:publsh:v:36:y:2006:i:3:p:362-80 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Kimberly Rollins & Diana Dumitras & Anita Castledine, 2008. "An Analysis of Congestion Effects Across and Within Multiple Recreation Activities," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(1), pages 95-116, March.
    8. Eugenio-Martin, Juan L., 2011. "Assessing social carrying capacity of tourism destinations with random utility models/Evaluación de la capacidad de carga social de los destinos turísticos con modelos de utilidad aleatoria," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 29, pages 881-902, Diciembre.
    9. Yoonae Jo, 2001. "Does college education nourish egoism?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 4(2), pages 115-128, September.
    10. Smith, V. Kerry & Mansfield, Carol, 1998. "Buying Time: Real and Hypothetical Offers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 209-224, November.
    11. Kwak, So-Yoon & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2015. "The public’s value for developing ocean energy technology in the Republic of Korea: A contingent valuation study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 432-439.
    12. Hermann Donfouet & Ephias Makaudze & Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Eric Malin, 2011. "The determinants of the willingness-to-pay for community-based prepayment scheme in rural Cameroon," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 209-220, September.
    13. John, Kun H. & Youn, Yeo C. & Shin, Joon H., 2003. "Resolving conflicting ecological and economic interests in the Korean DMZ: a valuation based approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 173-179, August.
    14. Ju-Chin Huang & V. Kerry Smith, 1998. "Monte Carlo Benchmarks for Discrete Response Valuation Methods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 186-202.
    15. Yoonae Jo, 2001. "Does college education nourish egoism?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 4(2), pages 115-128, June.
    16. Halkos, George, 2011. "Economic valuation of coastal zone quality improvements," MPRA Paper 35395, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Poe, Gregory L. & Bishop, Richard C., 1992. "Measuring the Benefits of Groundwater Protection from Agricultural Contamination: Results from a Two-Stage Contingent Valuation Study," Staff Papers 200549, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    18. Henrik Andersson & James Hammitt & Gunnar Lindberg & Kristian Sundström, 2013. "Willingness to Pay and Sensitivity to Time Framing: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application on Car Safety," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(3), pages 437-456, November.
    19. Jorge E. Araña & Carmelo J. León, 2012. "Scale-perception bias in the valuation of environmental risks," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(20), pages 2607-2617, July.
    20. Cameron, Trudy Ann & Englin, Jeffrey, 1997. "Respondent Experience and Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 296-313, July.
    21. Bergstrom, John C. & Taylor, Laura O., 2006. "Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: Theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 351-360, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    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:ags:arerjl:31564. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nareaea.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.