2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2009.07.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The value of recreational fishing in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia: A pooled revealed preference and contingent behaviour model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
60
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 100 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
3
60
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The revealed and stated trip responses are then analysed using panel count data modelling techniques. In a fisheries related application, Prayaga et al (2010) used a panel data truncated negative binomial contingent behaviour model to estimate the change in the value of recreational fishing as conditions along the Capricorn Coast in Central Queensland, Australia were varied.…”
Section: Estimating the Value Of Recreational Anglingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The revealed and stated trip responses are then analysed using panel count data modelling techniques. In a fisheries related application, Prayaga et al (2010) used a panel data truncated negative binomial contingent behaviour model to estimate the change in the value of recreational fishing as conditions along the Capricorn Coast in Central Queensland, Australia were varied.…”
Section: Estimating the Value Of Recreational Anglingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The error analysis confirms the generally good forecast performance of the model. The value of MAPE for within sample forecasts is 29.5% when calculated eliminating one outlying observation from Prayaga et al (2009) with value close to zero and large absolute percentage error. Including such observation in the calculation would increase the value of MAPE to 42.8%, confirming the sensitivity of this summary measure to extreme scores.…”
Section: Technical Annexmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…The story is no different in the GBRWHA: here too, most valuation studies have concentrated on a narrow range of benefits (Stoeckl et al, 2011) such as recreation (Carr and Mendelsohn, 2003;Hundloe et al, 1987;Knapman and Stoeckl, 1995;Kragt et al, 2009) or fishing and boating Prayaga et al, 2010). More recently, researchers have sought to learn more about some of the region's non-use values Rolfe and Windle, 2012b;Windle and Rolfe, 2005), but significant knowledge gaps remain (see Appendix A).…”
Section: Case Study Regionmentioning
confidence: 99%