IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/renvpo/doi10.1093-reep-reaa007.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Best Practices for Implementing Recreation Demand Models

Author

Listed:
  • Frank Lupi
  • Daniel J. Phaneuf
  • Roger H. von Haefen

Abstract

This article discusses best practices for implementing recreation demand models. We focus on insights that research and experience provide for the typical recreation application, where the analyst uses individual-level data to measure the value of changes in recreation site access or quality at one or more destinations. We examine issues related to data collection, pre-analysis tasks, modeling, and assessing quality, in addition to a discussion of future research needs. Our focus is on understanding best practices when the analyst’s goal is to present accurate estimates of economic value of recreation site access or quality, and so we prioritize practical steps rather than describing the frontiers of methodological research in recreation demand modeling.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank Lupi & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Roger H. von Haefen, 2020. "Best Practices for Implementing Recreation Demand Models," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(2), pages 302-323.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:renvpo:doi:10.1093/reep/reaa007
    DOI: 10.1093/reep/reaa007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/reep/reaa007
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/reep/reaa007
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1093/reep/reaa007?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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tobias Börger & Anna Maccagnan & Mathew P. White & Lewis R. Elliott & Tim Taylor, 2023. "Was the trip worth it? Consistency between decision and experienced utility assessments of recreational nature visits," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(2), pages 525-545, March.
    2. Dai, Peichao & Zhang, Shaoliang & Gong, Yunlong & Zhou, Yuan & Hou, Huping, 2022. "A crowd-sourced valuation of recreational ecosystem services using mobile signal data applied to a restored wetland in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    3. Scheufele, Gabriela & Pascoe, Sean, 2023. "Ecosystem accounting: Reconciling consumer surplus and exchange values for free-access recreation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    4. Swait, J. & de Bekker-Grob, E.W., 2022. "A discrete choice model implementing gist-based categorization of alternatives, with applications to patient preferences for cancer screening and treatment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    5. Merrill, Nathaniel & Mazzotta, Marisa J. & Mulvaney, Kate K. & Sawyer, Joshua Paul & Twichell, Julia & Atkinson, Sarina F. & Keith, Darryl & Erban, Laura, 2022. "The Value of Water Quality for Coastal Recreation in New England, USA," SocArXiv q2mg3, Center for Open Science.
    6. John N. Ng’ombe & B. Wade Brorsen, 2022. "The Effect of Including Irrelevant Alternatives in Discrete Choice Models of Recreation Demand," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 60(1), pages 71-97, June.
    7. Patrick Lloyd-Smith & Ewa Zawojska, 2024. "How stable and predictable are welfare estimates using recreation demand models?," Working Papers 2024-05, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    8. Gellman, Jacob & Walls, Margaret A. & Wibbenmeyer, Matthew, 2023. "Welfare Losses from Wildfire Smoke: Evidence from Daily Outdoor Recreation Data," RFF Working Paper Series 23-31, Resources for the Future.
    9. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Maria L. Loureiro & Ståle Navrud & John Rolfe, 2021. "Guidance to Enhance the Validity and Credibility of Environmental Benefit Transfers," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 575-624, July.
    10. Ceccacci, Alberto & Lopes, Ana Faria & Mulazzani, Luca & Malorgio, Giulio, 2024. "Recreation in coastal environments: Estimating the non-market value of fishing harbors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    11. Anne T. Byrne & David R. Just, 2023. "What is free food worth? A nonmarket valuation approach to estimating the welfare effects of food pantry services," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(4), pages 1063-1087, August.
    12. James Macaskill & Patrick Lloyd‐Smith, 2022. "Six decades of environmental resource valuation in Canada: A synthesis of the literature," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 70(1), pages 73-89, March.
    13. Boudreaux, Greg & Lupi, Frank & Sohngen, Brent & Xu, Alan, 2023. "Measuring beachgoer preferences for avoiding harmful algal blooms and bacterial warnings," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    14. Xie, Lusi & Adamowicz, Wiktor & Lloyd-Smith, Patrick, 2023. "Spatial and temporal responses to incentives: An application to wildlife disease management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    15. Paul Hindsley & Craig E. Landry & Kurt Schnier & John C. Whitehead & Mohammadreza Zarei, 2021. "Joint Estimation of Revealed Preference Site Selection and Stated Preference Choice Experiment Recreation Data Considering Attribute NonAttendance," Working Papers 21-10, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    16. Xie, Lusi & Adamowicz, Wiktor & Kecinski, Maik & Fooks, Jacob R., 2022. "Using economic experiments to assess the validity of stated preference contingent behavior responses," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    17. Randriamaro, Mary Tiana & Cook, Joseph, 2022. "The value of time, with and without a smartphone," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 138-146.
    18. Paul Hindsley & O. Ashton Morgan & John C. Whitehead, 2022. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Models for Artificial Reef Siting: A Study in the Florida Keys," Working Papers 22-05, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.

    More about this item

    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:ucp:renvpo:doi:10.1093/reep/reaa007. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/REEP .

    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.