Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Estimating the Recreational-Use Value for Hiking in Bellenden Ker National Park, Australia

  • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The recreational-use value of hiking in the Bellenden Ker National Park, Australia has been estimated using a zonal travel cost model. Multiple destination visitors have been accounted for by converting visitors’ own ordinal ranking of the various sites visited to numerical weights, using an expected-value approach. The value of hiking and camping in this national park was found to be $AUS 250,825 per year, or $AUS 144,45 per visitor per year, which is similar to findings from other studies valuing recreational benefits. The management of the park can use these estimates when considering the introduction of a system of user pays fees. In addition, they might be important when decisions need to be made about the allocation of resources for maintenance or upgrade of tracks and facilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). 1992. 1991 Census geographic areas. Census of population and housing. Catalogue No. 2905.0. ABS, Canberra

  • ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). 2001. Population by age and sex. Australian states and territories. Catalogue No. 3201.0. ABS, Canberra

  • D. R. Anderson D. J. Sweeney T. A. Williams (1990) Statistics for business and economics West Publishing New York

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Bojö (1985) A cost–benefit analysis of forestry in mountainous areas: The case of Valadelen Stockholm School of Economics Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • W. Brown F. Navas (1973) ArticleTitleImpact of aggregation on the estimation of outdoor recreation demand functions American Journal of Agricultural Economics 55 246–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Clawson, M. 1959. Methods of measuring the demand for and value of outdoor recreation. Resources for the Future (RFF) Reprint 10. RFF, Washington, DC

  • M. Clawson J. L. Knetsch (1996) Economics of outdoor recreation Johns Hopkins University Press Baltimore, MD

    Google Scholar 

  • D. A. Dillman (1978) Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method John Wiley & Sons New York

    Google Scholar 

  • S. A. Hajkowicz G. T. McDonald P. N. Smith (2000) ArticleTitleAn evaluation of multiple objective decision support weighting techniques in natural resources management Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 43 505–518

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanley N. D., and R. Ruffell. 1992. The valuation of forest characteristic. Working Paper No. 849. Institute for Economic Research, Queens University. Kingdom, Ontario, Canada

  • N. D. Hanley C. L. Spash (1993) Cost–benefit analysis and the environment Edward Elgar Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Hellerstein (1992) ArticleTitleThe treatment of nonparticipants in travel cost analysis and other demand models Water Resources Research 28 1999–2004 Occurrence Handle10.1029/92WR00762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilger, J. R. 1998. A bivariate compound poisson application: The welfare effects of forest fire on wilderness day-hikers. Unpublished M. S. thesis, Resources and Applied Economics, University of Nevada, Reno, NV

  • Hotelling, H. 1949. The Economics of public recreation. The Preitt report. Land and Recreation Planning Division, National Park Service U S Dept. of the Interior, Washington, DC

  • Knapman, B., and O. Stanley. 1991 A travel costs analysis of the recreational use value of Kakadu National Park. Kakadu Conservation Zone Inquiry Consultancy Series KAC91/23. Kakadu Conservation Zone Inquiry, Canberra

  • Kuosmanen, T., E. Nillesen, and J. Wesseler. (2003. Does ignoring multi-destination trips in the travel cost method cause a systematic downward bias? Working Paper Mansholt Graduate School MWP-09. Wageningen University, The Netherlands

  • Loomis, J. B., 2001. Final Snake River contingency value methodology study report. Submitted to the Wyoming Bureau of Land Management, Cheyenne, Wyoming

  • J. B. Loomis R. G. Walsh (1997) Recreation economic decisions: Comparing benefits and costs Venture Publishing, State College PA

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Nijkamp P. Rietveld H. Voogd (1990) Multicriteria evaluation in physical planning Elsevier Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Nillesen, E., J. Wesseler, and A. Cook. 2003. Correcting for multiple destination trips in recreational use values. An application to Bellenden Ker National Park, Australia, Working Paper Mansholt Graduate School MWP-07, Wageningen University, Waqeningen, The Netherlands

  • R. Perman Y. Ma J. McGilvray M. Common (2003) Natural resource and environmental economics Pearson London

    Google Scholar 

  • NRMA, 2002. Vehicle operating costs. Available from http://www.mynrma.com.au/motoring/cars/car_mr_op_about.shtml (accessed Novemeber 2001)

  • P. Rietveld (1989) ArticleTitleUsing ordinal information in decision making under uncertainty System Analysis, Modeling, Simulation 6 659–672

    Google Scholar 

  • W. D. Shaw P. Feather (1999) ArticleTitlePossibilities for including the opportunity costs of time in recreation demand systems Land Economics 75 592–602

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoeckl, N. 1993. A travel cost analysis of Hinchinbrook National Park, PhD thesis, James Cook University of North Queensland, Townsville, Australia

  • N. Stoeckl (1995) A travel cost analysis of Hinchinbrook National Park B. Faulkner M. Fagence M Davidson S. Craig-Smith (Eds) Tourism research and education in Australia Bureau of Tourism Research Canberra 181–201

    Google Scholar 

  • A. H. Trice S. E. Wood (1958) ArticleTitleMeasurement of recreational benefits Land Economics 3 195–207

    Google Scholar 

  • F. A. Ward D. Beal (2000) Valuing nature with travel cost models. A manual Edward Elgar Cheltenham, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • K. G. Willis G. D. Garrod (1991) ArticleTitleAn individual travel cost method of evaluating forest recreation Journal of Agricultural Economics 42 33–42

    Google Scholar 

  • InstitutionalAuthorNameWTMA (2000) Wet Tropics nature based tourism strategy WTMA Cairns, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Xue A. Cook C. Tisdell (2000) ArticleTitleBiodiversity and the tourism value of Changbai Mountain Biosphere Reserve, China: A travel cost approach Tourism Economics 6 335–357

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The Rainforest Cooperative Research Centre, Cairns, and the School of Economics, University of Queensland, Brisbane provided financial support for the case study. We are indebted to Hans-Peter Weikard and Steve Harrison for their valuable comments on an earlier version of this article Suggestions from three reviewers and the editor, Virginia Dale, are greatly appreciated.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eleonora Nillesen.

Appendix: The Expected Value Approach to Ranked Criteria Adopted from Nijkamp and others (1990)

Appendix: The Expected Value Approach to Ranked Criteria Adopted from Nijkamp and others (1990)

Assuming that J criteria need to be ranked in increasing order of importance and that weights are nonnegative and add up to 1, the set of feasible weights is

$$ S=\{ (\gamma _1 , \ldots ,\gamma _j )|0 \le \gamma _1 \le \gamma _2 \le \cdots \le \gamma _j ;\sum\limits_j {\gamma _j } = 1\} $$
(A1)

It is assumed that the probability density function of the weights is equal for all values in S. Thus, a uniform distribution of the weights in S is derived:

$$ \eqalign{ {g(\gamma _1 , \ldots ,\gamma _{J - 1} )} &= c {\rm \ if \ } :0 \le \gamma_1 \le {1 \over J} \cr &\quad {\gamma_1 \le \gamma_2 \le {1 \over {(J - 1)}} - {{\gamma _1 } \over {(J - 1)}}} \cr &\quad {\vdots } \cr &\quad {\gamma _{J - 2} \le \gamma _{J - 1} \le {1 \over 2} - {{\gamma _1 } \over 2} - \cdots {{\gamma _{J - 2} } \over 2}} \cr & =0 {\rm \ elsewhere}} $$
(A2)

In Rietveld (1989), it is shown that c = (J−1)!J !. Once the values γ1,...,γJ-1 are known, the value of γJ can be found as

$$ 1 - \gamma _1 - \cdots - \gamma _{J - 1} $$

The expected values of γ1,...,γJ−1 are the cardinalized values of rank numbers of 1,...,J. The expected value of an arbitrary γ j is given by:

$$ E(\gamma _j ) = \int_0^{1/J} \int_{\gamma _{1} }^{q_ {1}} \cdots \int_{\gamma _{J - 2} }^{q_ {J - 2} } {(J - 1)!J!\gamma _j } d_{\gamma_{J - 1}} \cdots d_{\gamma_{1}} $$
(A3)

where

$$ q_k = {1 \over {(J - K)}} - {{\gamma _1 } \over {(J - K)}} - \cdots {{\gamma _k } \over {J - K}}(k = 1, \ldots ,J - 2) $$
(A4)

After integrating out γJ−1, γJ−2,. γJ+1 in Equation A3, the following is obtained:

$$ \eqalign{E(\gamma _j ) &= \int_0^{1/J} \cdots \int_{\gamma_{j-1} }^{q_{j-1}}{(j-1)!J! \over (J-j-1)!(J-j)!} \cr &\quad (J-j+1)^{J-j+1_{\gamma_j}}\left(q_{j-1-\gamma j}\right)^{J-j-1} d_{\gamma j}\cdots d_{\gamma 1}}$$
(A5)

Integrating out rj in Equation in A5 and making use of the fact that the primitive function of x(a-x)n equals

$$ {{ - 1} \over {n + 1}}(a - x)^{n + 1} x - {1 \over {(n + 1)(n + 2)}}(a - x)^{n + 2} $$

the following results can be obtained after the appropriate integrations (Rietveld, 1989):

$$ \eqalign{ E(\gamma_1 ) &= {1 \over {J^2 }} \cr E(\gamma _2 ) &= {1 \over {J^2 }} + {1 \over {J(J - 1)}} \cr &\qquad\qquad{\vdots} \cr E(\gamma _{J - 1} ) &= {1 \over {J^2 }} + {1 \over {J(J - 1)}} + \cdots + {1 \over {J \times 2}} \cr E(\gamma _J ) &= {1 \over {J^2 }} + {1 \over {J(J - 1)}} + \cdots + {1 \over {J \times 2}} + {1 \over {J \times 1}} } $$
({\rm A}6)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nillesen, E., Wesseler, J. & Cook, A. Estimating the Recreational-Use Value for Hiking in Bellenden Ker National Park, Australia. Environmental Management 36, 311–316 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-003-0219-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-003-0219-7

Keywords

Navigation