Testing differences in estimation of river recreation benefits for international and domestic tourists as a function of single- versus multiple-destination day trips

Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 143-165

  Loomis, John ^a   Santiago, Luis E ^b  

^a Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO   (Puerto Rico)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation; Multiple destination trips; Single destination trips; Tourism; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

EID: 78651230565     PISSN: 19368623     EISSN: 19368631     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19368623.2011.536058     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Alpízar, F. (2006). The pricing of protected areas in nature-based tourism: A local perspective. Ecological Economics, 56, 294-307.
2. Andersson, J. (2007). The recreational cost of coral bleaching-a stated and revealed preference study of international tourists. Ecological Economics, 62, 704-715.
3. Arrow, K., Solow, R., Portney, P. R., Leamer, E. E., Radner, R., & Shuman, H. (1993). Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation (Report No. 58). Washington, DC: Federal Register.
4. Baral, N., Stern, M., & Bhattarai, R. (2008). Contingent valuation of ecotourism in Annapurna conservation area, Nepal: Implications for sustainable park finance and local development. Ecological Economics, 66, 208-227.
5. Barnes, J. I., Schier, C., & Van Rooy, G. (1999). Tourists' willingness to pay for wildlife viewing and wildlife conservation in Namibia. South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 29(4), 101-111.
6. Baysan, S. (2001). Perceptions of the environmental impacts of tourism: A comparative study of the attitudes of German, Russian and Turkish tourists in Kemer, Antalya. Tourism Geographies, 3, 218-235.
7. Bennett, R. M., Tranter, R. B., & Blaney, R. J. (2003). The value of countryside access: A contingent valuation survey of visitors to the Ridgeway National Trail in the United Kingdom. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 46, 659-671.
8. Cooper, J., & Loomis, J. (1993). Sensitivity of willingness-to-pay estimates to bid design in dichotomous choice models: Reply. Land Economics, 69, 203-208.
9. Díaz-Pérez, F., Bethencourt-Cejas, M., & Alvarez-González, J. (2005). The segmentation of canary island tourism markets by expenditure: Implications for tourism policy. Tourism Management, 26, 961-964.
10. Ellingson, L., & Seidl, A. (2007). Comparative analysis of non-market valuation techniques for the Eduardo Avaroa Reserve, Bolivia. Ecological Economics, 60, 517-525.
11. González-Cabán, A., & Loomis, J. (1997). Economic benefits of maintaining ecological integrity of Río Mameyes, in Puerto Rico. Ecological Economics, 21, 63-75.
12. Hanemann, W. M. (1984). Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66, 332-341.
13. Hanemann, W. M. (1989). Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete response data: Reply. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 71, 1057-1061.
14. Haspel, A., & Johnson, F. R. (1982). Multiple destination trip bias in recreation benefit estimation. Land Economics, 58, 364-372.
15. Kuosmanen, T., Nillesen, E., & Wesseler, J. (2004). Does ignoring multidestination trips in the travel cost method cause a systematic bias? The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 48, 629-651.
16. Kyle, G., Graefe, A., & Absher, J. (2002). Determining appropriate prices for recreation on public lands. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 20, 69-89.
17. Lindsey, G., & Holmes, A. (2002). Tourist support for marine protection in Nha Trang, Viet Nam. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 45, 461-480.
18. Loomis, J. (2006). A comparison of the effect of multiple destination trips on recreation benefits as estimated by travel cost and contingent valuation methods. Journal of Leisure Research, 38, 44-60.
19. Loomis, J., & Sorg, C. (1985). An introduction to wildlife valuation techniques. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 13(1), 38-46.
20. Mehmetoglu, M. (2006). Segmenting the nature-based tourists based on travel mode choice. Journal of Hospitality and Marketing Management, 14(4), 47-67.
21. Mehmetoglu, M. (2007). Nature-based tourists: The relationship between their trip expenditures and activities. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15, 200-215.
22. Mendelsohn, R., Hof, J., Peterson, G., & Johnson, R. (1992). Measuring recreational values with multiple destination trips. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 74, 926-933.
23. Nunes, P. (2002). Measuring the economic benefits of protecting the Parque Natural do Sudoeste Alentejano e Costa Vicentina from commercial tourism development: Results from a contingent valuation survey. Portuguese Economic Journal, 1(1), 71-87.
24. Richardson, R., Loomis, J., & Weiler, S. (2006). Recreation as a spatial good: Distance effects on changes in recreation visitation and benefits. The Review of Regional Studies, 36, 362-380.
25. Tussyadiah, I., Kono, T., & Morisugi, H. (2006). A model of multidestination travel: Implications for marketing strategies. Journal of Travel Research, 44, 407-417.
26. U.S. Water Resources Council. (1983). Economic and environmental principles and guidelines for water and related land resources implementation studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.