The recreational value of forests under different management systems

New Forests

Volumn 50, Issue 2, 2019, Pages 345-360

  Riccioli, F ^a   Marone, E ^a   Boncinelli, F ^a   Tattoni, C ^b   Rocchini, D ^b   Fratini, R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORENCE   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TRENTO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation; Forest management; Payment card; Random effects interval model

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ECOSYSTEMS; ELECTRONIC COMMERCE; RANDOM PROCESSES; RESOURCE VALUATION; SURVEYS; TIMBER;

CONTINGENT VALUATIONS; ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY; FOREST MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS; INTERVAL MODELS; MEDITERRANEAN AREAS; PAYMENT CARD; SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

FORESTRY;

BIODIVERSITY; CONTINGENT VALUATION; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTRY PRODUCTION; QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY; RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT; RESTORATION ECOLOGY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

BIODIVERSITY; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ECOSYSTEMS; FORESTRY; RANDOM PROCESSES; SURVEYS;

EID: 85049961522     PISSN: 01694286     EISSN: 15735095     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11056-018-9663-3     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Acar C, Sakici C (2008) Assessing landscape perception of urban rocky habitats. Build Environ 43:1153–1170
2. Alphonce R, Alfnes F, Sharma A (2014) Consumer vs. citizen willingness to pay for restaurant food safety. Food Policy 49:160–166
3. Andersen S, Harrison GW, Lau MI, Rutström EE (2006) Elicitation using multiple price list formats. Exp Econ 9(4):383–405
4. Backéus S, Wikström P, Lämås T (2006) Modeling carbon sequestration and timber production in a regional case study. Silva Fenn 40:615–629
5. Baerenklau KA, González-Cabán A, Paez C, Chavez E (2010) Spatial allocation of forest recreation value. J Forest Econ 16:113–126
6. Bernetti I, Ciampi C, Fagarazzi C, Sacchelli S (2009) I comparti forestale e di prima trasformazione del legno. In: AA.VV. Stima della potenzialità produttiva delle agrienergie in Toscana, Manuale ARSIA, Firenze, pp 43–70
7. Berrens RP, Bohara A, Kerkvliet J (1997) A randomized response approach to dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Am J Agric Econ 79:252–266
8. Bestard AB, Font AR (2009) Environmental diversity in recreational choice modelling. Ecol Econ 68:2743–2750
9. Birol E, Karousakis K, Koundouri P (2006) Using economic valuation techniques to inform water resources management: a survey and critical appraisal of available techniques and an application. Sci Total Environ 365:105–122
10. Boncinelli F, Pagnotta G, Riccioli F, Casini L (2015a) The determinants of quality of life in rural areas from a geographic perspective: the case of Tuscany. Rev Urban Reg Dev Stud 27:104–117
11. Boncinelli F, Riccioli F, Marone E (2015b) Do forests help to keep my body mass index low? Forest Policy Econ 54:11–17
12. Bord RJ, O’Connor RE (1997) The gender gap in environmental attitudes: the case of perceived vulnerability to risk. Soc Sci Q 78:830–840
13. Bottalico F, Pesola L, Vizzarri M, Antonello L, Barbati A, Chirici A, Corona P, Cullotta S, Garfi V, Giannico V, Lafortezza R, Lombardi F, Marchetti M, Nocentini S, Riccioli F, Travaglini D, Sallustio L (2016) Modeling the influence of alternative forest management scenarios on wood production and carbon storage: a case study in the Mediterranean region. Environ Res 144(Part B):72–87
14. Boyle KJ, Johnson FR, McCollum DW, Desvouges WH, Dunford RW, Hudson SP (1996) Valuing public goods: discrete versus continuous contingent-valuation responses. Land Econ 72:381–396
15. Brown K, Taylor L (2000) Do as you say, say as you do: evidence on gender differences in actual and stated contributions to public goods. J Econ Behav Organ 43:127–139
16. Cameron TA (1987) The impact of grouping coarseness in alternative grouped-data regression models. J Econom 35:37–57
17. Cameron TA, Englin J (1997) Respondent experience and contingent valuation of environmental goods. J Environ Econ Manag 33:296–313
18. Cameron TA, Huppert DD (1989) OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values with payment card interval data. J Environ Econ Manag 17:230–246
19. Cameron AC, Trivedi PK (2005) Microeconometrics: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, New York
20. Ceccarelli T, Salvati L, Bajocco S, Perini P (2015) Land-use trajectories and ‘syndromes’ of land degradation in Northern Italy. Ital J Reg Sci 1:85–98
21. Chaudhry P, Singh B, Tewari VP (2007) Non-market economic valuation in developing countries: role of participant observation method in CVM analysis. J Forest Econ 13:259–275
22. Ciccarese L, Mattsson A, Pettenella D (2012) Ecosystem services from forest restoration: thinking ahead. New Forest 43:543–560
23. Cozzi M, Persiani G, Viccaro M, Riccioli F, Fagarazzi C, Romano S (2015) Innovative approaches to the classification of rural areas: from the European addresses to the local application. Aestimum 67:97–110
24. Dhakal B, Yao RT, Turner JA, Barnard T (2012) Recreational users’ willingness to pay and preferences for changes in planted forest features. Forest Policy Econ 7:34–44
25. Edwards D, Jay M, Jensen FS, Lucas B, Marzano M, Montagné C, Peace A, Weiss G (2012) Public preferences for structural attributes of forests: towards a Pan-European perspective. Forest Policy Econ 19:12–19
26. EUROSTAT (2011) Forestry in the EU and the world, a statistical portrait. Eurostat statistical books, Publications Office of the European Union, ISBN 978-92-79-19988-2
27. FOREST EUROPE (2015) State of Europe’s Forests 2015. http://foresteurope.org/state-europes-forests-2015-report. Accessed 12 Apr 2018
28. Holgén P, Mattsson L, Li CZ (2000) Recreation values of boreal forest stand types and landscapes resulting from different silvicultural systems: an economic analysis. J Environ Manag 60:173–180
29. Horne P, Boxall PC, Adamowicz WL (2005) Multiple-use management of forest recreation sites: a spatially explicit choice experiment. Forest Ecol Manag 207:189–199
30. Hu W (2006a) Comparing consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for no-GM oil using a contingent valuation approach. Empir Econ 31:143–150
31. Hu W (2006b) Use of spike models in measuring consumers’ willingness to pay for non-GM oil. J Agric Appl Econ 38(3):525–538
32. Hu W, Woods T, Bastin S, Cox L, You W (2011) Assessing consumer willingness to pay for value-added blueberry products using a payment card survey. J Agric Appl Econ 43:243–258
33. INFC (2015) Third National Forest Inventory. http://www.sian.it/inventarioforestale. Accessed Aug 23 2017
34. ISTAT (2016) Occupazione e disoccupazione in Toscana. http://www.regione.toscana.it/-/occupazione-e-disoccupazione-in-toscana-dati-2016. Accessed 16 Mar 2018
35. Jacobs DF, Oliet JA, Aronson J, Bolte A, Bullock JM, Donoso PJ, Landhausser SM, Madsen P, Peng S, Rey-Benayas JM, Weber JC (2015) Restoring forests: What constitutes success in the twenty-first century? New Forest 46:601–614
36. Kniivila M (2006) Users and non-users of conservation areas: Are there differences in WTP, motives and the validity of responses in CVM surveys? Ecol Econ 59:530–539
37. Kula E (1994) Economics of natural resources, the environment and policies. Chapman & Hall, London
38. Lockwood M, Loomis J, DeLacy T (1993) A contingent valuation survey and benefit–cost analysis of forest preservation in East Gippsland, Australia. J Environ Manag 38:233–243
39. Loomis J (2005) Updated outdoor recreation use values on national forests and other public lands. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-658, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR
40. Marinelli A, Marone E (2013) Il valore economico totale dei boschi della Toscana. Franco Angeli editore, Milano
41. Mitchell RC, Carson RT (1984) A contingent valuation estimate of nation freshwater benefits. Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Resource for the future, Washington
42. Mitchell RC, Carson RT (1989) Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method. RFF Press, Washington
43. Molina JR, Rodriguez F, Herrera MA (2016) Integrating economic landscape valuation into Mediterranean territorial planning. Environ Sci Pol 56:120–128
44. Nicolescu, VN, Carvalho, J, Hochbichler, E, Bruckman, V, Piqué-Nicolau, M, Hernea, C, Viana, H, Štochlová, P, Ertekin, M, Tijardovic, M, Dubravac, T, Vandekerkhove, K, Kofman, PD, Rossney, D, Unrau, A (2017) Silvicultural guidelines for European coppice forests. COST Action FP1301 Reports. Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg
45. Nielsen AB, Olsen SB, Lundhede T (2007) An economic valuation of the recreational benefits associated with nature-based forest management practices. Landsc Urb Plan 80:63–71
46. Pouta E, Rekola M, Kuuluvainen J, Tahvonen O, Li CZ (2000) Contingent valuation of the Natura 2000 nature conservation programme in Finland. Forestry 73:119–128
47. Rabe-Hesketh S, Skrondal A (2012) Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using Stata. Vol I: Continuous responses, 3rd edn. Stata Press, College Station
48. Ready RC, Navrud S, Dubourg WR (2001) How do respondents with uncertain willingness to pay answer contingent valuation questions. Land Econ 77(3):315–326
49. Ressurreicao A, Gibbons J, Dentinho TP, Kaiser M, Santos RS, Edwards-Jones G (2011) Economic valuation of species loss in the open sea. Ecol Econ 70:729–739
50. Riccioli F, El Asmar T, El Asmar JP, Fagarazzi C, Casini L (2016) Artificial neural network for multifunctional areas. Environ Monit Assess 188:1–11
51. Riera P, Signorello G, Thiene M, Mahieu PA, Navrud S, Kaval P, Rulleau B, Mavsar R, Madureira L, Meyerhoff J, Elsasser P, Notaro S, De Salvo M, Giergiczny M, Dragoi S (2012) Non-market valuation of forest goods and services: good practice guidelines. J Forest Econ 18:259–270
52. Romano S, Cozzi M, Fanelli L, Viccaro M (2014) Climate change and forests vulnerability in Basilicata region: Economic damage evaluation. In: Conference proceedings environmental sustainability and food security, International Congress, Potenza, 17–19 June 2014
53. Roth M (2006) Validating the use of Internet survey techniques in visual landscape assessment: an empirical study from Germany. Landsc Urb Plan 78:179–192
54. Sacchelli S, Fagarazzi C, Bernetti I (2013) Economic evaluation of forest biomass production in central Italy: a scenario assessment based on spatial analysis tool. Biomass Bioenergy 53:1–10
55. Scarpa R, Gilbride TJ, Campbell D, Hensher DA (2009) Modelling attribute non-attendance in choice experiments for rural landscape valuation. Eur Rev Agric Econ 36(2):151–174
56. Schirpke U, Scolozzi R, De Marco C, Tappeiner U (2014) Mapping beneficiaries of ecosystem services flows from Natura 2000 sites. Ecosyst Serv 9:170–179
57. Tao Z, Yan H, Zhan J (2012) Economic valuation of forest ecosystem services in Heshui Watershed using contingent valuation method. Procedia Environ Sci 13:2445–2450
58. Tempesta T, Thiene M (2006) Percezione e valore del paesaggio. Franco Angeli editore, Milano
59. Tian X, Yu X, Holst R (2011) Applying the payment card approach to estimate the WTP for green food in China. No 23, IAMO Forum 2011: Will the “BRICs Decade” Continue? Prospects for Trade and Growth, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO)
60. Venkatachalam L (2004) The contingent valuation method: a review. Environ Impact Assess 24:89–124
61. Voces González R, Díaz Balteiro L, López-Peredo Martínez E (2010) Spatial valuation of recreation activities in forest systems: application to province of Segovia (Spain). Forest Syst 19:36–50
62. Voltaire L, Donfouet HPP, Pirrone C, Larzillière A (2017) Respondent Uncertainty and Ordering Effect on Willingness to Pay for Salt Marsh Conservation in the Brest Roadstead (France). Ecol Econ 137:47–55
63. Walsh RG, Loomis JB, Gillman RA (1984) Valuing option, existence and bequest demands for wilderness. Land Econ 60:4–29
64. Wang R, Zaho J, Liu Z (2016) Consensus in visual preferences: the effects of aesthetic quality and landscape types. Urb For Urb Green 20:210–217
65. Zandersen M, Termansen M (2013) TEEB Nordic case: assessing recreational values of Danish forests to guide national plans for afforestation. In: Kettunen M, Vihervaara P, Kinnunen S, D’Amato D, Badura T, Argimon M, Ten Brink P (eds) Socio-economic importance of ecosystem services in the Nordic countries: scoping assessment in the context of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB). Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen
66. Zandersen M, Tol Richard SJ (2009) A meta-analysis of forest recreation values in Europe. J Forest Econ 15:109–130