IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/toueco/v23y2017i3p680-691.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Segmenting visitors based on willingness to pay for recreational benefits

Author

Listed:
  • Fernanda Oliveira

    (School of Tourism and Maritime Technology and Tourism Research Group, Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, Portugal)

  • Pedro Pintassilgo

    (Faculty of Economics and Research Centre for Spatial and Organizational Dynamics, University of Algarve, Portugal)

  • Patrícia Pinto

    (Faculty of Economics and Research Centre for Spatial and Organizational Dynamics, University of Algarve, Portugal)

  • Isabel Mendes

    (ISEG School of Economics and Management and CGS – Research in Social Sciences and Management, University of Lisbon, Portugal)

  • João Albino Silva

    (Faculty of Economics and Research Centre for Spatial and Organizational Dynamics, University of Algarve, Portugal)

Abstract

This article uses a criterion-based method to segment visitors in the context of a contingent valuation survey. The National Forest of Leiria, located in central Portugal, is used as case study. Respondents are assigned to segments through a chi-squared automatic interaction detector method according to their willingness to pay for recreational improvements. This method identifies the main socio-economic and behavioural variables that differentiate the segments. The results show that the segment with the largest willingness to pay is formed by visitors who contribute to environmental protection and rate their recreational experience in the forest as very good. Besides these ‘environmentally friendly’ visitors, two other segments show willingness to pay above average: ‘graduates’ and ‘forest neighbours’. The study shows how the rich set of data provided by contingent valuation studies can be used to segment visitors, and therefore to support the planning and management of recreational facilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Fernanda Oliveira & Pedro Pintassilgo & Patrícia Pinto & Isabel Mendes & João Albino Silva, 2017. "Segmenting visitors based on willingness to pay for recreational benefits," Tourism Economics, , vol. 23(3), pages 680-691, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:toueco:v:23:y:2017:i:3:p:680-691
    DOI: 10.5367/te.2015.0526
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5367/te.2015.0526
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5367/te.2015.0526?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. Michael Christie, 1999. "An Assessment of the Economic Effectiveness of Recreation Policy Using Contingent Valuation," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 547-564.
    2. Kim, Samuel Seongseop & Timothy, Dallen J. & Hwang, Jinsoo, 2011. "Understanding Japanese tourists’ shopping preferences using the Decision Tree Analysis method," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 544-554.
    3. Bartczak, Anna & Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle & Zandersen, Marianne & Zylicz, Tomasz, 2008. "Valuing forest recreation on the national level in a transition economy: The case of Poland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(7-8), pages 467-472, October.
    4. Wan-Jiun Chen & Shyue-Cherng Liaw, 2012. "What is the Value of Eco-Tourism? An Evaluation of Forested Trails for Community Residents and Visitors," Tourism Economics, , vol. 18(4), pages 871-885, August.
    5. Andrew Mill, Greig & van Rensburg, Tom M. & Hynes, Stephen & Dooley, Conor, 2007. "Preferences for multiple use forest management in Ireland: Citizen and consumer perpectives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 642-653, January.
    6. G. V. Kass, 1980. "An Exploratory Technique for Investigating Large Quantities of Categorical Data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 29(2), pages 119-127, June.
    7. Gamini Herath & John Kennedy, 2004. "Estimating the Economic Value of Mount Buffalo National Park with the Travel Cost and Contingent Valuation Models," Tourism Economics, , vol. 10(1), pages 63-78, March.
    8. Eugene E. Ezebilo & Mattias Boman & Leif Mattsson & Anders Lindhagen & Werner Mbongo, 2015. "Preferences and willingness to pay for close to home nature for outdoor recreation in Sweden," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(2), pages 283-296, February.
    9. José Sanz & Luis Herrero & Ana Bedate, 2003. "Contingent Valuation and Semiparametric Methods: A Case Study of the National Museum of Sculpture in Valladolid, Spain," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 27(3), pages 241-257, November.
    10. Verbic, Miroslav & Slabe-Erker, Renata, 2009. "An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: A case study of the Volcji Potok landscape area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1316-1328, March.
    11. Kenji Okubo & Cornelis Gardebroek & Wim Heijman, 2014. "Research Note: The Economic Value and Roles of Rural Festivals in Japan," Tourism Economics, , vol. 20(5), pages 1125-1132, October.
    12. Schlapfer, Felix & Roschewitz, Anna & Hanley, Nick, 2004. "Validation of stated preferences for public goods: a comparison of contingent valuation survey response and voting behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 1-16, November.
    13. Guy Garrod & Kenneth G. Willis, 1999. "Economic Valuation of the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1368.
    14. Hanemann, W Michael, 1991. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 635-647, June.
    15. Silva Marzetti Dall'Aste Brandolini, 2009. "Recreational Demand Functions for Different Categories of Beach Visitor," Tourism Economics, , vol. 15(2), pages 339-365, June.
    16. Nick Hanley & Jacqui Knight, 1992. "Valuing the Environment: Recent UK Experience and an Application to Green Belt Land," Working Papers Series 92/11, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
    17. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639.
    18. do Valle, Patrícia Oom & Pintassilgo, Pedro & Matias, António & André, Filipe, 2012. "Tourist attitudes towards an accommodation tax earmarked for environmental protection: A survey in the Algarve," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1408-1416.
    19. Scarpa, Riccardo & Hutchinson, W. George & Chilton, Susan M. & Buongiorno, Joseph, 2000. "Importance of forest attributes in the willingness to pay for recreation: a contingent valuation study of Irish forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 315-329, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Moritz A. Drupp & Zachary M. Turk & Ben Groom & Jonas Heckenhahn, 2023. "Limited substitutability, relative price changes and the uplifting of public natural capital values," Papers 2308.04400, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    2. Eugene Ezebilo, 2016. "Willingness to Pay for Maintenance of a Nature Conservation Area: A Case of Mount Wilhelm, Papua New Guinea," Asian Social Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(9), pages 149-149, September.
    3. Legohérel, Patrick & Hsu, Cathy H.C. & Daucé, Bruno, 2015. "Variety-seeking: Using the CHAID segmentation approach in analyzing the international traveler market," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 359-366.
    4. López-Mosquera, Natalia & Sánchez, Mercedes, 2011. "The influence of personal values in the economic-use valuation of peri-urban green spaces: An application of the means-end chain theory," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 875-889.
    5. Jagoda Adamus, 2023. "How Much Are Public Spaces Worth? Non-Market Valuation Methods in Valuing Public Spaces," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 2, pages 66-89.
    6. Verbic, Miroslav & Slabe-Erker, Renata, 2009. "An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: A case study of the Volcji Potok landscape area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1316-1328, March.
    7. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
    8. Lienhoop, Nele & Ansmann, Till, 2011. "Valuing water level changes in reservoirs using two stated preference approaches: An exploration of validity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1250-1258, May.
    9. Gurluk, Serkan, 2006. "The estimation of ecosystem services' value in the region of Misi Rural Development Project: Results from a contingent valuation survey," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 209-218, December.
    10. Tanya O’Garra & Susana Mourato, 2007. "Public Preferences for Hydrogen Buses: Comparing Interval Data, OLS and Quantile Regression Approaches," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(4), pages 389-411, April.
    11. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
    12. Dragicevic, Arnaud Z. & Ettinger, David, 2011. "Private Valuation of a Public Good in Three Auction Mechanisms," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 1-29, April.
    13. Cheng-Te Lin & Yu-Sheng Huang & Lu-Wen Liao & Chung-Te Ting, 2020. "Measuring Consumer Willingness to Pay to Reduce Health Risks of Contracting Dengue Fever," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-15, March.
    14. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Bartczak, Anna & Giergiczny, Marek & Navrud, Stale & Żylicz, Tomasz, 2014. "Providing preference-based support for forest ecosystem service management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1-12.
    15. Choi, Andy S. & Ritchie, Brent W. & Papandrea, Franco & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Economic valuation of cultural heritage sites: A choice modeling approach," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 213-220.
    16. Diluiso, Francesca & Guastella, Gianni & Pareglio, Stefano, 2021. "Changes in urban green spaces’ value perception: A meta-analytic benefit transfer function for European cities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    17. Kelley, Hugh & van Rensburg, Thomas M. & Jeserich, Nadine, 2016. "Determinants of demand for recreational walking trails in Ireland," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 173-186.
    18. Henrik Andersson & Nicolas Treich, 2011. "The Value of a Statistical Life," Chapters, in: André de Palma & Robin Lindsey & Emile Quinet & Roger Vickerman (ed.), A Handbook of Transport Economics, chapter 17, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. María del Pilar García Pachón, 2016. "Instrumentos Económicos Y Financieros Para La Gestión Ambiental," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 853, htpr_v3_i.
    20. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.

    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:23:y:2017:i:3:p:680-691. 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.