User Fees and Equity Issues in Public Hunting Expenditures: The Case of Ring-Necked Pheasant in Oregon

Adams, Richard M.; Bergland, Olvar; Musser, Wesley N.; Johnson, S. L.; Musser, Lynn M.

doi:10.2307/3146805

Cited by 29 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings of Kerr and Manfredo (1991) from a study of backcountry hut users in New Zealand's parks suggest that previous fee paying behaviour affects paying intentions. Studies on the effects of previous visitation to a particular site or to a number of sites on WTP have, however, shown a mixed result (Adams et al 1989;Williams, Vogt and Vittersø, 1999).…”

Section: Factors Affecting Wtpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Willingness to pay entrance fees to natural attractions: An Icelandic case study

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introducing entrance fees to natural attractions may help counteract the threat of inadequate public funds for site maintenance and management. The primary objective of this study is to measure visitors' willingness to pay such fees in Iceland, where no such measurement has previously been undertaken. A questionnaire survey based on the contingent valuation method was carried out at two major natural attractions in Iceland: Gullfoss waterfall and Skaftafell National Park. Over 92% of the 252 respondents were willing to pay an entrance fee. Mean amounts and population consumer surplus estimates per season were Isk * 333 and Isk 41 million at Gullfoss and Isk 508 and Isk 34 million at Skaftafell, respectively. Modest fees would not significantly decrease the demand for these attractions. Slight differences were found in willingness to pay according to income, attitude towards environmental protection, number of previous visits, history of fee paying, country of residence, age and education. Implications of the empirical study for policy makers and site managers are provided.

show abstract

Section: Factors Affecting Wtpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Willingness to pay entrance fees to natural attractions: An Icelandic case study

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There have always been substitutes available for publicly maintained recreation areas. However, citizens' interest in 1 Equity issues have previously been emphasized by Adams et al (1989), More (1999) and Richer and Christensen (1999 Market-based demand studies cannot be applied in an analysis of recreation services, for these provide public goods that typically do not have market prices. Yet, researchers should provide information on the economic importance and management of state-owned recreation areas for the government, which must increasingly scrutinize the cost efficiency of services that it has heretofore provided to citizens free of charge.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Price Recreation in Finland?—A Contingent Valuation Study of Non-Market Benefits of Public Outdoor Recreation Areas

Huhtala¹

2004

Journal of Leisure Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Basic services in Finnish national parks and state-owned recreation areas have traditionally been publicly financed and thus free of charge for users. Since the benefits of public recreation are not captured by market demand, government spending on recreation services must be motivated in some other way. Here, we elicit people's willingness to pay (WTP) for services in the country's state-owned parks to obtain an estimate of the value of outdoor recreation in monetary terms. A variant of the Tobit model is used in the econometric analysis to examine the WTP responses elicited by a payment card format. We also study who the current users of recreation services are in order to enable policymakers to anticipate the redistribution effects of a potential implementation of user fees. Finally, we discuss the motives for WTP, which reveal concerns such as equity and ability to pay that are relevant for planning public recreation in general and for the introduction of fees in particular.

show abstract

“…Using this method, researchers employ supporting information in the process of adapting existing environmental valuation estimates to new study sites. Our study adapts contingent valuation (CVM) estimates of the aesthetic value of air quality (Rowe et al, 1980), travel-cost (TCM) estimates of the recreational value of upland game hunting sites (Adams, et al, 1989), and hedonic price (HDP) estimates of the value of reduced offsite wind erosion (Huszar, 1989). …”

Section: Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valuation of ecological resources

Scott¹,

Bilyard²,

Link³

et al. 1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Executive SummaryEcological resources are resources that have functional value to ecosystems. Frequently, these functions are overlooked in terms of the value they provide to humans. Environmental economics is in search of an appropriate analysis framework for such resources. In such a framework, it is essential to distinguish between two related subsets of information: 1) ecological processes that have intrinsic value to natural ecosystems, e.g., provision of vegetative cover, and 2) ecological functions that are valued by humans, e.g., provision of cleaner air. The present study addresses these concerns by identifying a habitat that is being displaced by development, and by measuring the human and ecological values associated with the ecological resources in that habitat. It is also essential to determine which functions are mutually exclusive (e.g., farming vs. soil stabilization) and which are, in effect, complementary or products of joint production (e.g. , soil stabilization and recreation).We apply several resource valuation tools , including contingent valuation methodology (CVM) , travel cost methodology (TCM), and hedonic damage-pricing (HDP). One way to derive upper-limit values for more difficult-to-value functions is through the use of "human analogs," because humanengineered systems are relatively inefficient at supplying the desired services when compared with natural systems. Where data on the relative efficiencies of natural systems and human analogs exist, it is possible to adjust the costs of providing the human analog by the relative efficiency of the natural system to obtain a more realistic value of the function under consideration.We demonstrate this approach in an environmental economic case study of the environmental services rendered by shrub-steppe habitats of Benton County, Washington State. Shrub-steppe is the dominant land cover across vast areas of the Intermountain West and Northern Mexico. It is often considered unattractive, poor-quality grazing land, but can also be developed for farming or urban uses where In its natural state, shrub-steppe habitat jointly provides numerous functions, including recreation, soil stabilization, and biological diversity, regulation of water flow, education, carbon fixing, and climate iii moderation. Because they are not mutually exclusive, the values of these functions can be added together. However, data are very limited on all but the soil stabilization, recreational hunting, and biodiversity functions.Soil stabilization improves aesthetics, reduces traffic hazards due to blowing dust, reduces household cleaning costs, and may slightly improve respiratory health of the human population. Contingent valuation study results, when applied to Benton County, result in relatively low values for shrubsteppe habitat--between $4 and $14/acre/year. Traffk accidents and road closures cost between $15 and $52/acre/year, while extra cleaning costs may be between $48 and $169/acre/year. Costs of retaining soil range between $6 and $2l/acre/year if the land is...

show abstract

User Fees and Equity Issues in Public Hunting Expenditures: The Case of Ring-Necked Pheasant in Oregon

Cited by 29 publications

References 11 publications

Willingness to pay entrance fees to natural attractions: An Icelandic case study

Willingness to pay entrance fees to natural attractions: An Icelandic case study

What Price Recreation in Finland?—A Contingent Valuation Study of Non-Market Benefits of Public Outdoor Recreation Areas

Valuation of ecological resources

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About