The growing recreational use of state forest lands in the Adelaide hills

Land Use Policy

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 137-152

  Smailes, Peter J ^a   Smith, Derek L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Distance decay; Forest; Management; Recreation; ROS; Travel cost; Value

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; FORESTRY; LAND USE; RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY;

AUSTRALIA;

EID: 0035000326     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0264-8377(01)00003-5     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Binning, C., 1995. Techniques to Value Environmental Resources: an Introductory Handbook. Commonwealth of Australia, Department of the Environment, Australian Government Printing Service, Canberra.
2. British Columbia Ministry of Forests, 1991. Outdoor Recreation Survey 1989-90: How British Columbians Use and Value their Public Forest Lands for Recreation. Victoria, BC.
3. Chapman, D.M., 1995. Ecotourism in State Forests of New South Wales: Who Visits and Why. State Forests of New South Wales and the University of Sydney, Sydney.
4. Commonwealth of Australia, Department of the Environment, 1996. Estimating Values of Australia's Native Forests. Australian Government Printing Service, Canberra.
5. Coppack, P.M., 1998. The role of amenity. In: Coppack, P.M., Russwurm, L.H., Bryant, C.R. (Eds.), Essays on Canadian Urban Process and Form. Department of Geography, Publication Series No. 30, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ont.
6. Don, A.R., 1978. Forest recreation in the Adelaide Hills: a study of visitors, attitudes and management implications. Unpublished, Master of Environmental Studies Thesis, University of Adelaide.
7. Driver, B.L., 1977. Item pool for scales designed to quantify the psychological outcomes desired and expected from recreation participation. Research Note, US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO.
8. Driver, B.L., Brown, P.J., 1978. The opportunity spectrum concept and behavioural information in outdoor recreation resource supply inventories. US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO.
9. Driver, B.L., Brown, P.J., 1986. Probable personal benefits of outdoor recreation. In: The President's Commission on Americans Outdoors: A Literature Review. US Government Printing Service, Washington, DC.
10. Driver, B.L., Brown, P.J., Stankey, G.H., Gregoire, T.G., 1987. The ROS planning system: evolution, basic concepts and research needed. Leisure Sciences 9, 201-212.
11. Driver, B.L., Tocher, S.R., 1970. Towards a behavioural interpretation of recreation engagements with implications for planning. In: Driver, B.L. (Ed.), Elements of Outdoor Recreation Planning. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.
12. Garrod, G.D., Willis, K.G., 1992. The amenity value of woodland in Great Britain: a comparison of economic estimates. Environmental and Resource Economics 2, 415-434.
13. Garrod, G.D., Willis, K.G., 1999. Methodological isssues in valuing the benefits of environmentally sensitive areas. Journal of Rural Studies 15, 111-117.
14. Hutchinson, W.G., Chilton, S.M., 1999. Combining preference ordering and contingent valuation methods to assess non-market benefit of alternative afforestation projects. Journal of Rural Studies 15, 103-109.
15. Layman, R.C., Boyce, J.R., Criddle, K.R., 1996. Economic value of the Chinook salmon sport fishery of the Gulkana River, Alaska, under current and alternative management plans. Land Economics 72 (1), 113-128.
16. McKean, J.R., Johnson, D.M., Walsh, R.G., 1995. Valuing time in travel cost demand analysis: an empirical investigation. Land Economics 71 (1), 96-105.
17. Mitchell, R.C., Carson, R.T., 1989. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Resources for the Future. John Hopkins University Press, Washington, DC.
18. Randall, A., 1994. A difficulty with the travel cost method. Land Economics 70 (1), 88-96.
19. Ready, R.C., Berger, M.C., Blomquist, G.C., 1997. Measuring amenity benefits from farmland: hedonic pricing vs. contingent valuation. Growth and Change 28, 438-458.
20. Resource Assessment Commission, 1991. A travel cost analysis of the recreation use value of Kakadu National Park. Kakadu Conservation Zone Inquiry Consultancy Series, KAC91/92, Australian Government Printing Service, Canberra.
21. Rudis, V.A., 1987. Recreational use of forested areas by Alabama residents. Research Paper SO-237, US Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, New Orleans.
22. Rudis, V.A., 1988. Nontimber values of East Texas Timberland. Research Bulletin SO-139, US Forest Service, Southern Forest Experiment Station, New Orleans.
23. Stankey, G.H., Wood, J., 1982. The recreation opportunity spectrum: an introduction. Australian Parks and Recreation, Feb: 6-14.
24. Van Der Zande, A.L., Poppelaars, A.J., Terkeurs, W.J., 1995. Distribution patterns of visitors in large areas: A problem of measurement and analysis. Leisure Studies 4, 85-100.