The impact of fees on visitation of national parks

Tourism Management

Volumn 27, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 1386-1396

  Schwartz, Zvi ^a   Lin, Li Chun ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b School of Business   (United States)

Author keywords

Demand; Parks visitation; Recreation fee; Revenue management; Tourists' attractions

Indexed keywords

NATIONAL PARK; POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; TOURISM MANAGEMENT; TOURIST ATTRACTION; TRAVEL DEMAND;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33746554421     PISSN: None     EISSN: 02615177     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tourman.2005.12.015     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Anderson K.H. The debate surrounding newly implemented recreation user fees on federal lands: An examination of those actively opposed (2000), The University of Montana, Thesis, Missoula, MT
2. Anderson K.H., and Freimund W.F. Multiple dimensions of active opposition to the recreation fee demonstration program. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 22 2 (2004) 44-64
3. Bamford E.T., Manning R.E., Forcier L.K., and Koenemann E.J. Differential campsite pricing: An experiment. Journal of Leisure Research 20 4 (1988) 324-342
4. Bowker J.M., Cordell H.K., and Cassandra Y.J. User fees for recreation services on public lands: A national assessment. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 17 3 (1999) 1-14
5. Bureau of Economic Analysis (2002). National Income and Product Accounts Tables. Table 2.2. Personal Consumption Expenditures by Major Type of Product Revised March 28, 2002. Retrieved May 15, 2003, from www.bea.gov/beahome.html
6. Dustin D.L., More T.A., and McAvoy L.H. The faithful execution of our public trust: Fully funding the national parks through taxes. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 18 4 (2000) 92-103
7. Fedler A.J., and Miles A.F. Paying for backcountry recreation: Understanding the acceptability of use fees. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 7 2 (1989) 35-46
8. Field, R. D., Krannich, R. S., Luloff, A. E., & Pratt, C. (1998). National park service managers' views toward the recreational fee demonstration program-1997 Research Summary. Pennsylvania State University, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Utah State University. No. 1-October 1998.
9. Krannich R.S., Eisenhauer B.W., Field D.R., Pratt C., and Luloff A.E. Implications of the national park service recreational fee demonstration program for park operations and management: Perceptions of NPS managers. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 17 3 (1999) 35-52
10. Leuschner A.W., Cook P.S., Roggenbuck J.W., and Oderwald R.G. A comparative analysis for wilderness user fee policy. Journal of Leisure Research 19 2 (1987) 101-114
11. Lindberg K., and Aylward B. Price responsiveness in the developing country nature tourism context: Review and Costa Rican case study. Journal of Leisure Research 31 3 (1999) 281-299
12. Lundgren, A., Lime, D. W., Waezech, C. A., & Thompson, J. L. (1997). Monitoring 1997 Park Visitor Reactions to the National Park Service Recreational Fee Demonstration Program. Research Summary. Cooperative Park Studies Unit., University of Minnesota. No. 10- December 1997.
13. Marsinko, A. (2000). The effect of fees on recreation site choice: Management/agency implications. In Proceedings of the 1999 Northeastern recreation research symposium, April 11-14, 1999. The Sagamore on Lake George in Bolton Landing. New York. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE 269. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North-eastern Research Station, Newton Square, PA (pp. 164-171).
14. Martin S.R. A policy implementation analysis of the recreation fee demonstration program: Convergence of public sentiment, agency programs, and policy principles?. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 17 3 (1999) 15-34
15. McDonald D.C., Noe F.P., and Hammit W.E. Expectations and recreation fees: A dilemma for recreation resource administrators. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 5 2 (1987) 1-9
16. More T., and Stevens T. Do user fees exclude low-income people from resource-based recreation?. Journal of Leisure Research 32 3 (2000) 341-357
17. More T.A., Dustin D.L., and Knopf R.C. Behavioral consequences of campground user fees. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 14 1 (1996) 81-93
18. Relling, S., Cheng, H., Robinson, C., & McCarville, R. (1995). Potential equity effect of a new day-use fee. In C.P. Dawson (Ed.), Comp. Proceedings of the 1995 Northeastern recreation re-search symposium, April 9-11; 1995. Saratoga Springs, NY. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-218, US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Radnor, PA (pp. 27-31).
19. Schneider I.E., and Budruk M. Displacement as a response to the federal recreation fee program. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 17 30 (1999) 76-84
20. Schneider, I., LaPointe, C., & Stievater, S. (2000). Perceptions of and preferences for fee program dollar utilization among wilderness visitors. In D.N. Cole, S.F. McCool, W.T. Borrie, & J. O'Loughlin (Eds.), Wilderness science in a time of change conference-Vol. 4: Wilderness visitors, experiences, and visitor management, May 23-27, 1999. Missoula, MT. Proc. RMRS-P-15-Vol. 4, US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, UT (pp. 164-166).
21. Schroeder H.W., and Louviere J. Stated choice models for predicting the impact of user fees at public recreation sites. Journal of Leisure Research 31 3 (1999) 300-324
22. Street, B. (2002). 1979-2001 visitation database. National Park Service, US Department of the Interior, Public Use Statistics Office. (On-Line) Available: www2.nature.nps.gov/stats/.
23. Tourism Office, US Department of Commerce (2002). International arrivals to the US-Historical visitation. (On-Line) Available: http://tinet.ita.doc.gov/
24. US Department of the Interior, US Department of Agriculture (1998). Recreational Fee Demonstration Program: Progress Report to Congress.
25. US General Accounting Office (1998). Recreation Fees: Demonstration Fee Program Successful in Raising Revenues but Could Be Improved. Report to Congressional Requesters.
26. US General Accounting Office. (2001). Recreation Fees: Management Improvements Can Help the Demonstration Program Enhance Visitor Services. Report to the Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on National Parks, Historic Preservation, and Recreation, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, US Senates.
27. Watson A.E., and Gamini H. Research implications of the theme issues "Recreation Fees and Pricing Issues in the Public Sector" (Journal of Park and Recreation Administration) and "Societal Response to Recreation Fees on Public Lands". Journal of Leisure Research 31 3 (1999) 325-344
28. Winter L.P., Palucki L.J., and Burkhardt R.L. Anticipated responses to a fee program: The key is trust. Journal of Leisure Research 31 3 (1999) 207-226