Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-k7p5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T21:02:06.095Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Measuring Use Value from Recreation Participation: Reply

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

John C. Whitehead*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858

Extract

In Whitehead (1992), I proposed a one-step method of estimating recreational use values. I appreciate the opportunity to clarify several points made in the original paper and correct some mathematical errors. The criticisms raise three major issues that should be addressed: the theoretical construct of use value, diminishing marginal utility, and empirical specification. Before I address the criticisms I would like to emphasize that the one-step, recreation-participation method is not viewed as superior to the two-step, travel-cost method or any of its extensions. The method is a means of obtaining order of magnitude use-value estimates if the travel-cost method can not be implemented. To re-state one of the conclusions: “The one-step method is a useful, low-cost substitute for two-step travel cost models when research budgets are limited (Whitehead, 1992 p. 118).” This notion was underemphasized in the original paper.

Type
Comments and Replies
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1994

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

English, Donald B. K. and Bowker, J. M., “Measuring Use Value from Recreation Participation: Comment”, J. Agr. and Applied Econ., (1994):311313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, William H., Econometric Analysis, 2nd Edition, New York: Macmillan, 1993.Google Scholar
Whitehead, John C., “Measuring Use Value from Recreation Participation,S. J. Agr. Econ., (1992): 113119.Google Scholar