Use value of cultural experiences: A comparison of contingent valuation and travel cost

Tourism Management

Volumn 42, Issue , 2014, Pages 141-148

  Armbrecht, John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation method; Cultural institution; Non market valuation; Public good; Travel cost method; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTINGENT VALUATION; CULTURAL INFLUENCE; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; TOURIST BEHAVIOR; TOURIST DESTINATION; TRAVEL DEMAND; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 84889638107     PISSN: None     EISSN: 02615177     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tourman.2013.11.010     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Alberini A., Longo A. Combining the travel cost and contingent behavior methods to value cultural heritage sites: evidence from Armenia. Journal of Cultural Economics 2006, 30(4):287-304.
2. Andersson T.D., Armbrecht J., Lundberg E. Estimating use and non-use values of a music festival. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 2012, 12(3):215-231. 10.1080/15022250.2012.725276.
3. Andersson T.D., Lundberg E. Commensurability and sustainability: triple impact assessments of a tourism event. Tourism Management 2013, 37(0):99-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.12.015.
4. Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P.R., Leamer E.E., Radner R., Schuman H. Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation 1993.
5. Bedate A., Herrero L., Sanz J. Economic valuation of a contemporary art museum: correction of hypothetical bias using a certainty question. Journal of Cultural Economics 2009, 33(3):185-199.
6. Bedate A., Herrero L.C., Sanz J.Á. Economic valuation of the cultural heritage: application to four case studies in Spain. Journal of Cultural Heritage 2004, 5(1):101-111.
7. Bille Hansen T. The willingness-to-pay for the royal theatre in Copenhagen as a public good. Journal of Cultural Economics 1997, 21(1):1-28.
8. Carson R.T., Flores N.E., Martin K.M., Wright J.L. Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: comparing the estimates for quasi-public goods. Land Economics 1996, 72(1):80-99.
9. Carson R.T., Mitchell R.C., Hanemann W.M., Kopp R.J., Presser S., Ruud P.A. Acontingent valuation study of lost passive use values resulting from the Exxon Valdez oil spill 1992, A report to the Attorney General of the State of Alaska.
10. Cesario F.J. Value of time in recreation benefit studies. Land Economics 1976, 52(1):32-41.
11. Choi A. Willingness to pay: how stable are the estimates?. Journal of Cultural Economics 2009, 33(4):301-310.
12. Clarke P.M. Testing the convergent validity of the contingent valuation and travel cost methods in valuing the benefits of health care. Health Economics 2002, 11(2):117-127. 10.1002/hec.651.
13. Del Saz Salazar S., Montagud Marques J. Valuing cultural heritage: the social benefits of restoring and old Arab tower. Journal of Cultural Heritage 2005, 6(1):69-77.
14. Desvousges W.H., Johnson F.R., Dunford R.W., Boyle K.J., Hudson S.P., Wilson N. Measuring natural resource damages with contingent valuation: tests of validity and reliability. Contingent valuation: A critical assessment 1993, 91-159. North Holland, Amsterdam. J.A. Hausman (Ed.).
15. Dharmaratne G.S., Brathwaite A.E. Economic valuation of the coastline for tourism in Barbados. Journal of Travel Research 1998, 37(2):138-144. 10.1177/004728759803700205.
16. Driml S. Travel cost analysis of recreation value in the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area. Economic Analysis and Policy 2002, 32(2):11-26.
17. Fleming C.M., Cook A. The recreational value of Lake McKenzie, Fraser Island: an application of the travel cost method. Tourism Management 2008, 29(6):1197-1205.
18. Garrod G., Willis K.G. Economic valuation of the environment: Methods and case studies 2001, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
19. Gujarati D.N., Porter D.C. Basic econometrics 2009, McGraw-Hill, Boston.
20. Hanemann W.M. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1994, 8(4):19-43.
21. Hanley N., Barbier E. Pricing nature: Cost-benefit analysis and environmental policy 2009, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham.
22. Haspel A.E., Johnson F.R. Multiple destination trip bias in recreation benefit estimation. Land Economics 1982, 58(3):364-372. 10.2307/3145943.
23. Herrero L.C., Sanz J.A., Devesa M., Bedate A., del Barrio M.J. The economic impact of cultural events: a case-study of Salamanca 2002, European Capital of Culture. European Urban and Regional Studies 2006, 13(1):41-57. 10.1177/0969776406058946.
24. Hotelling H. Letter of June 18, 1947, to Newton B. Durry. Included in the report. The economics of public recreation: An economic study of the monetary evaluation of recreation in the national parks, 1949 1947, Land and Recreational Planning Division, National Park Service, Washington, DC, Mimeographed.
25. Kim S.S., Wong K.K.F., Cho M. Assessing the economic value of a world heritage site and willingness-to-pay determinants: a case of Changdeok Palace. Tourism Management 2007, 28(1):317-322.
26. Kling R.W., Revier C.F., Sable K. Estimating the public good value of preserving a local historic landmark: the role of non-substitutability and citizen information. Urban Studies 2004, 41(10):2025-2041. 10.1080/0042098042000256369.
27. Kriström B. Discrete and continuous valuation questions - Do they give different answers 1988, Technical report, Department of Forest Economics, The Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
28. Maddison D., Mourato S. Valuing different road options for Stonehenge. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 2001, 4(4):203-212.
29. Mayor K., Scott S., Tol R. Comparing the travel cost method and the contingent valuation method - An application of convergent validity theory to the recreational value of Irish forests 2007, Papers, Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin.
30. McConnell K.E., Strand I. Measuring the cost of time in recreation demand analysis: an application to sportfishing. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1981, 63(1):153-156.
31. Mendelsohn R., Hof J., Peterson G., Johnson R. Measuring recreation values with multiple destination trips. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1992, 74(4):926-933. 10.2307/1243190.
32. Mitchell R.C., Carson R.T. Using surveys to value public goods: The contingent valuation method 1989, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
33. Mmopelwa G., Kgathi D.L., Molefhe L. Tourists' perceptions and their willingness to pay for park fees: a case study of self-drive tourists and clients for mobile tour operators in Moremi Game Reserve, Botswana. Tourism Management 2007, 28(4):1044-1056. 10.1016/j.tourman.2006.08.014.
34. Navrud S., Mungatana E.D. Environmental valuation in developing countries: the recreational value of wildlife viewing. Ecological Economics 1994, 11(2):135-151. 10.1016/0921-8009(94)90024-8.
35. Navrud S., Ready R.C. Valuing cultural heritage: Applying environmental valuation techniques to historic buildings, monuments and artifacts 2002, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
36. Noonan D. Contingent valuation and cultural resources: a meta-analytic review of the literature. Journal of Cultural Economics 2003, 27(3):159-176.
37. Poor P.J., Smith J.M. Travel cost analysis of a cultural heritage site: the case of historic St. Mary's City of Maryland. Journal of Cultural Economics 2004, 28(3):217-229.
38. Powe N.A., Willis K.G. Benefits received by visitors to heritage sites: a case study of Warkworth Castle. Leisure Studies 1996, 15(4):259-275.
39. Randall A. Adifficulty with the travel cost method. Land Economics 1994, 70(1):88-96.
40. Ribaudo M.O., Epp D.J. The importance of sample discrimination in using the travel cost method to estimate the benefits of improved water quality. Land Economics 1984, 60(4):397-403.
41. Rolfe J., Windle J. Valuing the protection of aboriginal cultural heritage sites. Economic Record 2003, 79(Special issue):85-95.
42. Ruijgrok E.C.M. The three economic values of cultural heritage: a case study in the Netherlands. Journal of Cultural Heritage 2006, 7(3):206-213.
43. Sanz J.A., Herrero L.C., Bedate A.M. Contingent valuation and semiparametric methods: a case study of the national museum of sculpture in Valladolid, Spain. Journal of Cultural Economics 2003, 27:241-257.
44. Schwer R.K., Daneshvary R. Willingness to pay for public television and the advent of "look-alike" cable television channels: a case study. Journal of Media Economics 1995, 8(3):95-109.
45. Smith R.J. The evaluation of recreation benefits: the Clawson method in practice. Urban Studies 1971, 8(2):89-102. 10.1080/00420987120080191.
46. Smith V.K. Travel cost demand models for wilderness recreation: a problem of non-nested hypotheses. Land Economics 1975, 51(2):103-111.
47. Snowball J. The economic valuation of cultural events in developing countries: Combining market and non-market valuation techniques at the South African National Arts Festival 2005, Rhodes University.
48. Tabachnick B.G., Fidell L.S. Using multivariate statistics 2006, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA.
49. Throsby C.D. Economics and culture 2001, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
50. Throsby C.D. Determining the value of cultural goods: how much (or how little) does contingent valuation tell us?. Journal of Cultural Economics 2003, 27:275-285.
51. Throsby C.D., Withers G.A. Measuring the demand for the arts as a public good: theory and empirical results. Economics of cultural decisions 1983, Abt Books, Cambridge, MA. W.S. Hendon, J.L. Shanahan (Eds.).
52. Tietenberg T.H., Lewis L. Environmental and natural resource economics 2008, Pearson Addison Wesley, Boston, Mass.
53. Tuan T., Navrud S. Capturing the benefits of preserving cultural heritage. Journal of Cultural Heritage 2008, 9(3):326-337.
54. Walsh R.G., Loomis J.B., Gillman R.A. Valuing option, existence, and bequest demands for wilderness. Land Economics 1984, 60(1):14-29.
55. Ward F.A., Johnson T.G., McConnell K.E., Strand I.E. Measuring the cost of time in recreation demand analysis: comment; reply. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1983, 65(1):172-174.
56. Venkatachalam L. The contingent valuation method: a review. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2004, 24(1):89-124.