Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-k7p5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T06:40:57.592Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Hedonic Analysis of Private Hunting Land Attributes Using an Alternative Functional Form

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2016

Mark L. Messonier  and
E. Jane Luzar
Mark L. Messonier
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station, Agricultural Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana
E. Jane Luzar
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station, Agricultural Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A hedonic framework is used to analyze selected attributes of Louisiana deer hunting leases that are hypothesized to be significant contributors to lease value. The flexible Box-Cox functional form is used in contrast to the often utilized linear regression specification. Additionally, the hypothesis of regional differences in slope coefficients of lease attributes is addressed. Results indicate that hunters in the two analyzed regions value lease attributes and services differently.

Keywords

hedonicdeer huntingBox-Coxlease attributes
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , December 1990 , pp. 129 - 135
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, C.E. “Texas Deer Hunting Lease Register”. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin, Texas, 1988.Google Scholar
Blomquist, G. and Worley, L.. “Hedonic Prices, Demand for Urban Housing Amenities and Benefit Estimates”. J. Urban Econ., 9(1981):212–221.Google Scholar
Box, G.E.P. and Cox, D.R.. “An Analysis of Transformations”. J. Royal Stat. Soc, 26(2)(1964):211–252.Google Scholar
Brorsen, B.W., Grant, W.R., and Rister, M.E.. “A Hedonic Price Model for Rough Rice Bid/Acceptance Markets”. Am. J. Agr. Econ., 66(1984):156–163.Google Scholar
Chow, G.C. “Tests of Equality Between Sets of Coefficients in Two Linear Regressions”. Econometrica. 28(1960):591–605.Google Scholar
Cooper, M.L., Deck, L.B., and McConnell, K.E.. “On the Choice of Functional Form for Hedonic Price Functions”. Resources for the Future Discussion Paper QE87-08. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 1987.Google Scholar
Dillman, D.A. Mail and Telephone Surveys. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1978.Google Scholar
Ethridge, D.E. and Davis, B.. “Hedonic Price Estimation for Commodities: an Application to Cotton”. West. J. Agr. Econ., 7(1982):293–300.Google Scholar
Farrar, , Louisiana, J. Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. Personal communication, 1989.Google Scholar
Griliches, Z. ed. Price Indexes and Quality Changes: Studies in New Methods of Measurement. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard U. Press, 1971.Google Scholar
Halvorsen, R. and Pollakowski, H.O.. “Choice of Functional Form for Hedonic Price Equations”. Urban Econ., 10(1981):37–49.Google Scholar
Hotvedt, J.E. and Luzar, E.J.. “The Economic Value of White-Tailed Deer Hunting on the Sherburne Wildlife Management Area and the Atchafalaya National Wildlife Refuge.” Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin No. 820, December, 1989.Google Scholar
Judge, G.G., Hill, R.C., Griffiths, W.E., Lutkepohl, H., and Lee, T.C.. Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Econometrics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1988.Google Scholar
Lancaster, K.J. “A New Approach to Consumer Theory”. J. Pol. Econ., 74(1966): 132–157.Google Scholar
Libby, L. Research Issues Related to Recreational Access. R.D. No>. 747, West Virginia University Extension Service, Morgan town, West Virginia 1989.Google Scholar
Livengood, K.R. “Value of Big Game from Markets for Hunting Leases: The Hedonic Approach”. Land Econ., 59(1983):287–291.Google Scholar
McMillan, M.L., Reid, B.G., and Gillen, D.W.. “An Extension of the Hedonic Approach for Estimating the Value of Quiet” Land Econ. 56(1980):315–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milon, J.W., Gressel, J., and Mulkey, D.. “Hedonic Amenity Valuation and Functional Form Specification”. Land Econ. 60(1984):378–387.Google Scholar
Pope, C.A. and Stoll, J.R.. “The Market Value of Ingress Rights for White-Tailed Deer Hunting in Texas”. So. J. Agr. Econ., 17(1985): 177–182.Google Scholar
Pope, C.A., Adams, C.E., and Thomas, J.K.. “The Recreational and Aesthetic Value of Wildlife in Texas”. J. Leisure Res. 16(1984):51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosen, S. “Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition”. J. Pol. Econ. 82(1974):34–55.Google Scholar
White, K.J. “SHAZAM: A Comprehensive Computer Program For Regression Models (Version 6)”. Computational Stat. & Data Anal., December, 1988.Google Scholar
Wilson, W.W.. “Hedonic Prices in the Malting Barley Market”. West. J. Agr. Econ., 9(1984):29–40.Google Scholar
Witte, A.D., Sumka, J.H., and Erekson, H.. “An Estimate of a Structural Hedonic Price Model of the Housing Market An Application of Rosen's Theory of Implicit Markets”. Econometrica.47(1979):1151–1173.Google Scholar
Ziemer, R.F., Musser, N.W., and Hill, R.C.. “Recreation Demand Equations: Functional Form and Consumer Surplus”.Am. J. Agr. Econ., 62(1980):136–141.Google Scholar