Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:09:46.783Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testing Significance of Multi-Destination and Multi-Purpose Trip Effects in a Travel Cost Method Demand Model for Whale Watching Trips

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

John Loomis ,
Shizuka Yorizane  and
Douglas Larson
John Loomis
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at Colorado State University
Shizuka Yorizane
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at Colorado State University
Douglas Larson
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of California, Davis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Inclusion of multi-destination and multi-purpose visitors has an appreciable influence on a standard count data travel cost model derived estimate of willingness to pay but the differences are not statistically significant. We adapt a more general travel cost model (TCM) of Parsons and Wilson (1997) that allows for inclusion of multi-destination visitors as incidental demand to allow estimation of an unbiased measure of single and multi-destination willingness to pay for whale viewing using a single pooled equation. The primary purpose trip values from the standard TCM and simple generalized TCM model are identical at $43 per person per day and neither are significantly different from the $50 day value from a generalized model that distinguishes between joint and incidental trips. The general models avoid underestimation of total recreation site benefits that would result from omitting the consumer surplus of multi-destination visitors.

Type
Articles
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , October 2000 , pp. 183 - 191
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bockstael, N.I. Strand and Hanemann, M. 1987. “Time and The Recreation Demand Model.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 69(2): 293–302.Google Scholar
Creel, M. and Loomis, J. 1990. “Theoretical and Empirical Advantages of Truncated Count Data Estimators for Analysis of Deer Hunting in California.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 72(2): 434–441.Google Scholar
Creel, M. and Loomis, J. 1991. “Confidence Intervals for Welfare Measures with Application to a Problem of Truncated Counts.” Review of Economics and Statistics 73(2): 370–373.Google Scholar
Gum, R.L. and Martin, W.E. 1975. “Problems and Solutions in Estimating the Demand for and Value of Rural Outdoor Recreation.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 57(4): 558–566.Google Scholar
Haspel Abraham, E. and Reed Johnson, F. 1982. “Multiple Destination Trip Bias in Recreation Benefit Estimation.” Land Economics 58(3): 364–372.Google Scholar
Hellerstein, Daniel. 1991. “Using Count Data models in Travel Cost Analysis with Aggregate Data.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73(3): 860–867.Google Scholar
Hellerstein, Daniel. 1992. “The Treatment of Nonparticipants in Travel Cost Analysis and Other Demand Models.” Water Resources Research 28(8): 1999–2004.Google Scholar
Hellerstein, Daniel and Mendelsohn, Robert. 1993. “Theoretical Foundations for Count Data Models.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75(3): 604–611.Google Scholar
McConnell, Kenneth and Strand, Ivar. 1981. “Measuring the Cost of Time in Recreation Demand Analysis: Application to Sportfishing.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61: 153–156.Google Scholar
Mendelsohn, R.J. Hof, Peterson, G. and Johnson, R. 1992. “Measuring Recreation Values with Multiple Destination Trips.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 74: 926–933.Google Scholar
Parsons, G.R. and Wilson, Aaron J. 1997. “Incidental and Joint Consumption in Recreation Demand.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review April 1-6.Google Scholar
Smith, V.K. and Kopp, R. 1980. “The Spatial Limits of the Travel Cost Recreational Demand Model.” Land Economics 56: 64–72.Google Scholar
Wilman, Elizabeth. 1980. “The Value of Time in Recreation Benefit Studies.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 7: 272–286.Google Scholar