IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v34y2006i2p189-209.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling Multiple-Objective Recreation Trips with Choices Over Trip Duration and Alternative Sites

Author

Listed:
  • Chia-Yu Yeh
  • Timothy Haab
  • Brent Sohngen

Abstract

Traditionally, recreation demand studies have focused on single-day, single-activity trips, despite anecdotal and empirical evidence that many recreational trips involve overnight stays and multiple purposes. This paper develops a random utility model that explores how visitors choose alternative sites and trip durations for multiple-objective trips. We focus on a recreational activity, beach visits, that appear to have significant proportions of the population taking single and multiple-day trips, and many of the multiple day trips involve multiple objectives. Multiple-duration and multiple-objective issues are incorporated in pricing trip costs. The results of the research suggest that the accepted method for incorporating travel costs into random utility models can lead to biased estimates of the structural utility parameters and, consequently, biased measures of welfare in a multiple-objective trip setting for single- and multiple-day users. Copyright Springer 2006

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:34:y:2006:i:2:p:189-209
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-005-6205-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10640-005-6205-1
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10640-005-6205-1?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hanemann, W. Michael, 1982. "Applied Welfare Analysis with Qualitative Response Models," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt7982f0k8, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    2. Hanemann, W. Michael, 1982. "Applied Welfare Analysis with Qualitative Response Models," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt7982f0k8, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    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. Nico Polman & Arianne de Blaeij & Stijn Reinhard & Louis Slangen, 2011. "Landscape and the commercial benefits of recreation," ERSA conference papers ersa10p910, European Regional Science Association.
    2. Lankia, Tuija & Huhtala, Anni, 2011. "Valuation of Trips to Second Homes in the Country: Do Environmental Attributes Matter?," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114405, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. 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.
    4. Pascoe, Sean, 2019. "Recreational beach use values with multiple activities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 137-144.
    5. Wolf, David M. & Georgic, Will C. & Klaiber, Allen, 2017. "Reeling in the Damages: Harmful Algal Blooms' Impact on Lake Erie's Recreational Fishing Industry," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258096, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Chen, Min, 2009. "Does Economic Endogeneity of Site Facilities in Recreation Demand Models Lead to Statistical Endogeneity?," Graduate Research Master's Degree Plan B Papers 55808, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Leif E. Anderson & S. Todd Lee & Phillip S. Levin, 2013. "Costs of Delaying Conservation: Regulations and the Recreational Values of Exploited and Co-occurring Species," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(2), pages 371-385.
    11. Chen, Min & Lupi, Frank, 2013. "Modeling Long Overnight Trips by Chaining Recreation Sites," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150489, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Mkwara, Lena & Marsh, Dan & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2015. "The effect of within-season variability on estimates of recreational value for trout anglers in New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 338-345.
    13. 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.
    14. Roberto Martínez-Espiñeira & John B. Loomis & Joe Amoako-Tuffour & Joseph M. Hilbe, 2008. "Comparing Recreation Benefits from On-Site versus Household Surveys in Count Data Travel Cost Demand Models with Overdispersion," Tourism Economics, , vol. 14(3), pages 567-576, September.

    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. Richard Batley & Thijs Dekker, 2019. "The Intuition Behind Income Effects of Price Changes in Discrete Choice Models, and a Simple Method for Measuring the Compensating Variation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(1), pages 337-366, September.
    2. Ginés de Rus & Javier Campos & Daniel Graham & M. Pilar Socorro & Jorge Valido, 2020. "Evaluación Económica de Proyectos y Políticas de Transporte: Metodología y Aplicaciones. Parte 1: Metodología para el análisis coste-beneficio de proyectos y políticas de transporte," Working Papers 2020-11, FEDEA.
    3. Heng Z. Chen & Frank Lupi & John P. Hoehn, 1999. "An Empirical Assessment of Multinomial Probit and Logit Models for Recreation Demand," Chapters, in: Joseph A. Herriges & Catherine L. Kling (ed.), Valuing Recreation and the Environment, chapter 5, pages 141-162, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Nunes, Luis C. & Cunha-e-Sa, Maria & Ducla-Soares, Maria, 1998. "Testing for rationality: the case of discrete choice data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 255-261, September.
    5. Juutinen, Artti & Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ovaskainen, Ville, 2014. "Estimating the benefits of recreation-oriented management in state-owned commercial forests in Finland: A choice experiment," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 396-412.
    6. Ortega, David L. & Waldman, Kurt B. & Richardson, Robert B. & Clay, Daniel C. & Snapp, Sieglinde, 2016. "Sustainable Intensification and Farmer Preferences for Crop System Attributes: Evidence from Malawi’s Central and Southern Regions," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 139-151.
    7. Bujosa Bestard, Angel & Font, Antoni Riera, 2009. "Environmental diversity in recreational choice modelling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2743-2750, September.
    8. Hicks, Robert L. & Holland, Daniel S. & Kuriyama, Peter T. & Schnier, Kurt E., 2020. "Choice sets for spatial discrete choice models in data rich environments," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    9. Tudor, Lynne G. & Besedin, Elena Y. & Fisher, Michael & Smith, Stuart, 1999. "Economic Analysis Of Environmental Regulations: Application Of The Random Utility Model To Recreational Benefit Assessment For The Mp&M Effluent Guideline," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21630, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Deely, J. & Hynes, S. & Curtis, J., 2019. "Are objective data a suitable replacement for subjective data in site choice analysis?," Working Papers 309602, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    11. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Swait, Joffre & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1996. "A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 243-253, September.
    12. Joan Mogas & Pere Riera & Raul Brey, 2009. "Combining Contingent Valuation and Choice Experiments. A Forestry Application in Spain," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(4), pages 535-551, August.
    13. Donna Dosman & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2006. "Combining Stated and Revealed Preference Data to Construct an Empirical Examination of Intrahousehold Bargaining," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 15-34, March.
    14. Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa, 2013. "Preference discontinuity in choice experiment: Determinants and implications," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 138-145.
    15. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    16. Needelman, Michael S. & Kealy, Mary Jo, 1995. "Recreational Swimming Benefits Of New Hampshire Lake Water Quality Policies: An Application Of A Repeated Discrete Choice Model," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 1-10, April.
    17. Czajkowski, Mikolaj & Buszko-Briggs, Malgorzata & Hanley, Nick, 2009. "Valuing changes in forest biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2910-2917, October.
    18. Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly & Richard Batley, 2018. "Revisiting consistency with random utility maximisation: theory and implications for practical work," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(2), pages 181-204, March.
    19. Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ollikainen, Markku, 2013. "Valuation of environmental and societal trade-offs of renewable energy sources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1148-1156.
    20. Waleska Sigüernza & Petr Mariel, 2013. "Valoración económica de los servicios sanitarios en la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 207(4), pages 71-99, December.

    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:kap:enreec:v:34:y:2006:i:2:p:189-209. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.