Economic valuation of cultural heritage sites: A choice modeling approach

Abstract

Despite growing attention by researchers and policy makers on the economic value of cultural heritage sites, debate surrounds the use of adequate methods. Although choice modeling techniques have been applied widely in the environmental economics field, their application in tourism and cultural economics has been much more limited. This paper contributes to the knowledge on the economic valuation of cultural heritage sites through a national choice modeling study of Old Parliament House, Australia. The study sought to value marginal changes in several attributes of this site and revealed that only some of them are valued positively: extending the period of temporary exhibitions, hosting various events, and having 'shop and café ' and 'fine dining'. Advantages of using a mixed logit model are provided and managerial and policy implications are discussed.

Credit-Based Payments for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in Ecuador

“…It is now also popular among environmental economists as a tool for understanding individuals" preferences for environmental attributes through stated preference (SP) studies (Hoyos, 2010). DCA has been used to evaluate preferences for forests (Brey, Riera, & Mogas, 2007), wetlands (Carlsson, Frykblom, & Liljenstolpe, 2003), beaches (Beharry-Borg & Scarpa, 2010), landscape beauty (Dachary-Bernard & Rambonilaza, 2012), fish (Agimass & Mekonnen, 2011), and cultural heritage (Choi, Ritchie, Papandrea, & Bennett, 2010), amongst many other environs and ES (see Atkinson, Bateman, & Mourato, 2012 for a recent review of valuation of ES and biodiversity).…”

Examining the Attributes of Electronic Waste Recycling Service: A Choice Modelling Approach

“…Respondents are given a series of question called choice set based on the attributes of the subject. Respondents are then presented with different descriptions of the subject, differentiated in their attributes and levels, and they are asked to rank, and then rate or choose one preferred option from several alternatives (Choi et al, 2010).…”

Willingness to Pay for Urban Water Body Recreational Facilities: A Case Study at Diyatha Uyana

“…Therefore, many studies have emphasized the importance of accessing the monetary value of intangible and non-market benefits of open urban green spaces (Jim & Chen, 2006). Studies assessing the economic value of natural resources such as ecosystem services, biodiversity and wildlife, cultural goods and waste and resource management have increased with the increased awareness of aesthetic, ecological and environmental and public social functions of these resources (Choi, Ritchie, Papandrea, & Bennett, 2010;Nielsen, Olsen, & Lundhede, 2007;Noonan, 2003;Shang, Che, Yang, & Jiang, 2012;Venkatachalam, 2004). In the past, aesthetic or scenic quality of environmental assets was valued using qualitative methods.…”