IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/toueco/v20y2014i2p263-277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Eliciting Users' Preferences for Cultural Heritage and Tourism-Related E-Services: A Tale of Three European Cities

Author

Listed:
  • Aline Chiabai

    (Basque Centre for Climate Change, Bilbao, Spain)

  • Stephen Platt

    (University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK)

  • Wadim Strielkowski

    (Department of Marketing Communication and Public Relations, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University in Prague, Smetanovo nabrezi 6, 11000 Prague 1, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to show how surveys are used to elicit users' preferences and willingness to pay for novel packages of e-services used in commercial tourism. The authors analyse data gathered from 5,100 questionnaire survey responses by residents, visitors and service providers in three European cities – Amsterdam, Genoa and Leipzig. The results show that people are willing to pay for some of the proposed e-services, while other services clearly represent a cost. The findings are important for the improvement of decisions in the tourism industry, which often uses various combinations of e-services to promote cultural heritage, enhancing visitors' experiences. In addition, the results may help to identify eventual prices that could be charged for the use of e-services in cultural heritage.

Suggested Citation

  • Aline Chiabai & Stephen Platt & Wadim Strielkowski, 2014. "Eliciting Users' Preferences for Cultural Heritage and Tourism-Related E-Services: A Tale of Three European Cities," Tourism Economics, , vol. 20(2), pages 263-277, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:toueco:v:20:y:2014:i:2:p:263-277
    DOI: 10.5367/te.2013.0290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5367/te.2013.0290
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5367/te.2013.0290?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. Nick Hanley & Susana Mourato & Robert E. Wright, 2001. "Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuatioin?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    2. 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, January.
    3. Bateman, Ian J. & Day, Brett H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Jude, Simon, 2009. "Reducing gain-loss asymmetry: A virtual reality choice experiment valuing land use change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 106-118, July.
    4. Earnhart, Dietrich, 2002. "Combining Revealed and Stated Data to Examine Housing Decisions Using Discrete Choice Analysis," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 143-169, January.
    5. Donggen Wang & Si-Ming Li, 2004. "Housing Preferences in a Transitional Housing System: The Case of Beijing, China," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(1), pages 69-87, January.
    6. Alexandros Apostolakis & Shabbar Jaffry, 2006. "Correcting for Sample Selection Bias in Stated Preference Tourist Surveys," Tourism Economics, , vol. 12(3), pages 451-468, September.
    7. Anna Alberini & Paolo Rosato & Margherita Turvani (ed.), 2006. "Valuing Complex Natural Resource Systems," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4193, March.
    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. Svetlana Ivanova & Artyom Latyshov, 2018. "Sustainable entrepreneurship: agrarian policy in South Korea," Post-Print hal-01857436, HAL.
    2. Wadim Strielkowski, 2017. "Promoting Tourism Destination through Film-Induced Tourism: The Case of Japan," Tržište/Market, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, vol. 29(2), pages 193-203.
    3. Svetlana Ivanova & Artyom Latyshov, 2018. "Sustainable entrepreneurship: agrarian policy in South Korea," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 5(4), pages 748-760, June.
    4. Wadim Strielkowski & Svetlana Zenchenko & Anna Tarasova & Yana Radyukova, 2022. "Management of Smart and Sustainable Cities in the Post-COVID-19 Era: Lessons and Implications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Mitsche Nicole & Strielkowski Wadim, 2016. "Tourism e-services and Jewish heritage: a case study of Prague," European Journal of Tourism, Hospitality and Recreation, Sciendo, vol. 7(3), pages 203-211, December.
    6. Elena Korneeva & Nina Olinder & Wadim Strielkowski, 2021. "Consumer Attitudes to the Smart Home Technologies and the Internet of Things (IoT)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-15, November.

    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. Anna Alberini & Alberto Longo & Patrizia Riganti, 2006. "Using Surveys to Compare the Public’s and Decisionmakers’ Preferences for Urban Regeneration: The Venice Arsenale," Working Papers 2006.137, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    2. Massimiliano Castellani & Pierpaolo Pattitoni & Laura Vici, 2015. "Pricing Visitor Preferences for Temporary Art Exhibitions," Tourism Economics, , vol. 21(1), pages 83-103, February.
    3. Alberini, Anna & Longo, Alberto & Riganti, Patrizia, 2006. "Using Surveys to Compare the Public's and Decision-makers' Preferences for Urban Regeneration: The Venice Arsenale," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12221, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    4. Murwirapachena, Genius & Dikgang, Johane, 2018. "An empirical examination of reducing status quo bias in heterogeneous populations: evidence from the South African water sector," MPRA Paper 91549, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Bond, Craig A. & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Bond, Jennifer Keeling, 2008. "What to Choose? The Value of Label Claims to Fresh Produce Consumers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-26.
    6. Choi, Andy S., 2013. "Nonmarket values of major resources in the Korean DMZ areas: A test of distance decay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 97-107.
    7. Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre & Andersson, Henrik & Beaumais, Olivier & Crastes dit Sourd, Romain & Hess, François-Charles & Wolff, François-Charles, 2017. "Stated preferences: a unique database composed of 1657 recent published articles in journals related to agriculture, environment, or health," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 98(3), November.
    8. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    9. Barr, Rhona F. & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Investigating fishers' preferences for the design of marine Payments for Environmental Services schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 91-103.
    10. 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.
    11. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    12. Sardaro, Ruggiero & La Sala, Piermichele & De Pascale, Gianluigi & Faccilongo, Nicola, 2021. "The conservation of cultural heritage in rural areas: Stakeholder preferences regarding historical rural buildings in Apulia, southern Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    13. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    14. repec:eid:wpaper:7/09 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Broberg, Thomas & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Persson, Lars, 2021. "Household preferences for load restrictions: Is there an effect of pro-environmental framing?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    16. Hyesun Kim & Jooa Baek & Yeongbae Choe, 2021. "Family life cycle and preferences for a mega-sporting event package: The case of the 2018 PyeongChang Winter Olympic Games," Tourism Economics, , vol. 27(3), pages 548-568, May.
    17. del Saz Salazar, Salvador & Hernandez Sancho, Francesc & Sala Garrido, Ramon, 2009. "Estimación del valor económico de la calidad del agua de un río mediante una doble aproximación: una aplicación de los principios económicos de la Directiva Marco del Agua," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(01), pages 1-27.
    18. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2013. "Dynamic hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments: Evidence from measuring the impact of corporate social responsibility on consumers demand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 53-61.
    19. Alemu I, Jahson Berhane & Schuhmann, Peter & Agard, John, 2019. "Mixed preferences for lionfish encounters on reefs in Tobago: Results from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Mario du Preez & Michael C. Sale, 2012. "Determining the impact of low-cost housing development on nearby property prices using discrete choice analysis," Working Papers 265, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    21. Birol, Ekin & Kontoleon, Andreas & Smale, Melinda, 2006. "Combining revealed and stated preference methods to assess the private value of agrobiodiversity in Hungarian home gardens:," EPTD discussion papers 156, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

    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:sae:toueco:v:20:y:2014:i:2:p:263-277. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.