Travel cost analysis of a cultural heritage site: The case of Historic St. Mary's City of Maryland

被引:73
作者
Poor P.J. [1 ]
Smith J.M. [2 ]
机构
[1] Department of Economics, St. Mary's College of Maryland, St. Mary's City
[2] Office of Research and Development, United State Environmental Protection Agency, Washington
关键词
Cultural heritage; Historic archaeological site; Travel cost model;
D O I
10.1023/B:JCEC.0000038020.51631.55
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Historic St. Mary's City located in rural southern Maryland, marks the 17th century British Colonial capital of the State of Maryland. As with most cultural heritage sites, Historic St. Mary's City can be classified as possessing public goods-type characteristics, and as such, welfare benefit estimates must utilize non-market valuation techniques. To date, the primary valuation methodology used for cultural heritage sites research involves stated preference methods. This study is one of the first to employ a revealed preference methodology, the zonal travel cost model, to estimate the consumer surplus welfare measures of a cultural heritage site. We analyze three years of visitor sample data to compare three functional forms of visitor demand. The average of the annual individual consumer surplus measures ranged from approximately $8.00 to $19.26, depending on the functional forms used. When aggregated to the total number of individual paid visitors, the average annual benefit estimates range from approximately $75,492 to $176,550. © 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers.
引用
收藏
页码:217 / 229
页数:12
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]  
Bergstrom J.C., Cordell H.K., An analysis of the demand for and value of outdoor recreation in the U.S, Journal of Leisure Research, 23, 1, pp. 67-86, (1991)
[2]  
Bockstael N.E., Strand I.E., Hanemann W.M., Time and the recreational demand model, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 69, 2, pp. 293-302, (1987)
[3]  
Cesario F.J., Value of time in recreation benefit studies, Land Economics, 51, 2, pp. 32-41, (1976)
[4]  
Clawson M., Methods of measuring the demand for and value of outdoor recreation, The Economics of the Environment, (1994)
[5]  
Eiswerth M.E., Englin J., Fadali E., Shaw W.D., The value of water levels in water-based recreation: A pooled revealed preference/contingent behavior approach, Water Resources Research, 36, pp. 1079-1086, (2000)
[6]  
Forrest D., Grime K., Woods R., Is it worth subsidising repertory theatre?, Oxford Economic Papers, 52, pp. 381-397, (2000)
[7]  
Grijalva T.C., Berrens R.P., Bohara A.K., Shaw W.D., Testing the validity of contingent behavior trip responses, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 84, 2, pp. 401-414, (2002)
[8]  
Gujarati D.N., Basic Econometrics, 3rd Edn., (1995)
[9]  
Hanley N.D., Valuing rural recreation benefits: An empirical comparison of two approaches, Journal of Agricultural Economics, 40, 3, pp. 361-374, (1989)
[10]  
Hellerstein D., Welfare estimation using aggregate and individual-observation models: A comparison using Monte Carlo techniques, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 77, 3, pp. 620-630, (1995)