Discrete choice methodologies are increasingly being used to estimate multiple-sites recreational demands and evaluate the welfare effects of alternative environmental policies aimed at water quality improvements. In this study the authors use 1985 data on Indiana anglers to estimate a multinomial logit model of destination choice and compute the benefits of alternative water quality improvements. In general, the results indicate that anglers are reasonably sensitive to changes in water quality. The per-trip welfare gains from a 1% reduction in various pollutants range from 4.9 to 25.3 cents and a similar reduction in all pollutants increases per-trip welfare by 64.5 cents.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AthertonTBen-AkivaMMcFaddenDTrainK, 1990, “Micro-simulation of local residential telephone demand under alternative service options and rate structures”, in Telecommunications Demand Modelling: An Integrated View Eds FontenayAShugadMSibleyD (North Holland, New York) pp 137–163
2.
Ben-AkivaMLermanS, 1985Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
3.
BockstaelNHanemannMStrandI, 1984, “Measuring the benefits of water quality improvements using recreational demand models”, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460
4.
BrownH, 1980, “A model of weekend recreational travel demand”, working paper, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Melbourne, Australia
5.
CaulkinsPBishopRBouwesN, 1986, “Travel cost model for lake recreation: a comparison of two methods for incorporating site quality and substitution effects”American Journal of Agricultural Economics68291–297
6.
ChowT JPattersonC C, 1962, “The occurrences and significance of lead isotopes and pelagic sediments”Geochimica et Cosmochimca Acta26263–326
7.
FeenbergDMillsE, 1980Measuring the Benefits of Water Quality Improvement (Academic Press, New York)
8.
FreemanA M, 1979The Benefits of Environmental Improvement: Theory and Practice (Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, MD)
HannemannM, 1978A Methodological and Empirical Study of the Recreation Benefits from Improved Water Quality PhD dissertation, Department of Economics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
11.
KitamuraRKostyniukLTingK, 1979, “Aggregation in spatial choice modeling”Transportation Science13325–342
12.
KlingC, 1988a, “Comparing welfare estimates of environmental quality changes from recreation demand models”Journal of Environmental Economics and Management15331–340
13.
KlingC, 1988b, “The reliability of estimates of environmental benefits from recreation demand models”American Journal of Agricultural Economics70892–901
14.
KoppJ FKronerR C, 1967Trace Metals in Waters of the United StatesFederal Water Pollution Control Administration, Cincinnati; copy available from National Information Technical Services, Springfield, VA 22161
15.
McFaddenD, 1978, “Modelling residential choice location”, in Spatial Interaction Theory and Planning Models Eds KarlqvistALundqvistLSnickersFWeibullJ (North Holland, Amsterdam) pp 75–96
16.
ParsonsGKealyM, 1992, “Randomly drawn opportunity sets in a random utility model of lake recreation”Land Economics6893–106
17.
ParsonsGNeedelmanM S, 1992, “Site aggregation in a random utility model of recreation”Land Economics68418–433
18.
PatrickRFletcherJLovejoyS, 1987, “Water quality and value of recreational fishing: a quasi-aggregated attributed approach”, WP 86-13, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
19.
RibaudoM, 1985, “Water quality impacts on recreational fishing”, working paper, US Department of Agriculture, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20550
20.
SmallKRosenH, 1981, “Applied welfare economics with discrete choice models”Econometrica49105–130
21.
SmithKKaoruY, 1986, “Modelling recreation demand within a random utility framework”Economic Letters22395–399
22.
TayR, 1990Modelling Recreational Activities Using Discrete Choice Frameworks PhD dissertation, Department of Economics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
23.
TrainR, 1979Quality Criteria for Water (Castle House Publications, Tunbridge Wells, Kent)
24.
WatanatadaTBen-AkivaM, 1977, “Development of an aggregate model of urbanised area travel behavior”, final report prepared for US Department of Transportation, 400, 7th Street, SW Washington DC 20590
25.
WatanatadaTBen-AkivaM, 1979, “Forecasting urban travel demand for quick policy analysis with disaggregate choice models: a Monte Carlo simulation approach”Transportation Research A13241–248
