Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Travel Cost Model

  • Chapter
A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation

Part of the book series: The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Resources ((ENGO,volume 3))

Abstract

The travel cost model is used to value recreational uses of the environment. For example, it may be used to value the recreation loss associated with a beach closure due to an oil spill or to value the recreation gain associated with improved water quality on a river. The model is commonly applied in benefit-cost analyses and in natural resource damage assessments where recreation values play a role. Since the model is based on observed behavior, it is used to estimate use values only.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adamowicz, W. L. 1994. Habit Formation and Variety Seeking in a Discrete Choice Model of Recreation Demand. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 19(1):19–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adamowicz, W., J. Louviere, and M. Williams. 1994. Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 26:271–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adamowicz, W. L., J. Swait, P. Boxall, and M. Williams. 1997. Perception Versus Objective Measures of Environmental Quality in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Models of Environmental Evaluation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32:65–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, T. 1996. A Discrete Choice Model of Recreational Trout Angler Benefits in Pennsylvania. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Economics, West Chester University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Akiva, M., and S. Lerman. 1985. Discrete Choice Analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bockstael, N. E. 1995. Travel Cost Models. Handbook of Environmental Economics. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bockstael, N. E., and I. E. Strand. 1987. The Effect of Common Sources of Regression Error on Benefit Estimates. Land Economics 63(1):11–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bockstael, N., W. M. Hanemann, and C. L. Kling. 1987. Estimating the Value of Water Quality Improvements in a Recreational Demand Framework. Water Resources Research 23(5):951–960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bockstael, N. E., W. M. Hanemann, and I. E. Strand, Jr. 1984. Measuring the Benefits of Water Quality Improvements Using Recreation Demand Models. Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. College Park, MD: University of Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bockstael, N. E., K. E. McConnell, and I. E. Strand. 1988. Benefits from Improvements in Chesapeake Bay Water Quality. Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. College Park, MD: University of Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bockstael, N. E., K.E. McConnell, and I. E. Strand. 1989. A Random Utility Model for Sportfishing: Some Preliminary Results for Florida. Marine Resource Economics 6:245–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bockstael, N. E., K. E. McConnell, and I. E. Strand, Jr. 1991. Recreation: Measuring the Demand for Environmental Quality. New York: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bockstael, N. E., I. E. Strand, and W. M. Hanemann. 1987. Time and the Recreational Demand Model. American Journal of Agricultural Economics:293–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G. M., R. Congar, and E. A. Wilman. 1983. Recreation: Tourists and Residents. In Assessing the Social Costs of Oil Spills: The Amoco Cadiz Case Study. U.S. National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Report (NTIS PB83-100536). Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G., and R. Mendelsohn. 1984. The Hedonic Travel Cost Method. Review of Economics and Statistics 66:427–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, O., and D. Brewer. 1971. Estimation of net Social Benefits from Outdoor Recreation. Econometrica 39(5):813–828.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H. Z., and S. R. Cosslett. 1998. Environmental Quality Preference and Benefit Estimation in Multinomial Probit Models: A Simulation Approach. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80(3):512–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cicchetti, C. J., A. C. Fisher, and V. K. Smith. 1976. An Econometric Evaluation of a Generalized Consumer Surplus Measure: The Mineral King Controversy. Econometrica 44(6):1259–1276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creel, M. D., and J. B. Loomis. 1990. Theoretical and Empirical Advantages of Truncated Count Data Estimators for Analysis of Deer Hunting in California. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 72:434–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dilman, D.A. 2000. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method (2ndedition). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, P., and W. D. Shaw. 1999. Estimating the Cost of Leisure Time for Recreation Demand Models. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 38:49–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, A. M. III. 1993. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W. H. 1997. Econometric Analysis (3rd Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haab, T. C., and K. E. McConnell. 1996. Count Data Models and the Problem of Zeros in Recreation Demand Analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 78:89–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haab, T. C, and K. E. McConnell. 2002. Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackett, S. C. 2000. The Recreational Economic Value of the Eastern Trinity Alps Wilderness. School of Business and Economics, Humbolt State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanemann, W. M. 1999. Welfare Analysis with Discrete Choice Models. In Valuing Recreation and the Environment: Revealed Preference Methods in Theory and Practice. Edited by Herriges, J. A., and C. L. Kling. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauber, A. H. IV, and G. R. Parsons. 2000. The Effect of nesting Structure on Welfare Estimation in Random Utility Models: An Application to the Demand for Recreational Fishing. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 82:501–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausman, J. A., G K. Leonard, and D. McFadden. 1995. A Utility-Consistent, Combined Discrete Choice and Count Data Model: Assessing Recreational Use Losses Due to Natural Resource Damage. Journal of Public Economics 56:1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellerstein, D. 1999. Can We Count on Count Models? In Valuing Recreation and the Environment: Revealed Preference Methods in Theory and Practice. Edited by Herriges, J. A., and C. L. Kling. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hellerstein, D., and R. Mendelsohn. 1993. A Theoretical Foundation for Count Data Models. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75:604–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herriges, J. A., and C. L. Kling, eds. 1999. Valuing Recreation and the Environment: Revealed Preference Methods in Theory and Practice. Aldershot, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herriges, J. A., C. L. Kling, and D. J. Phaneuf. 1999. Corner Solution Models of Recreation Demand: A Comparison of Competing Frameworks. In Valuing Recreation and the Environment: Revealed Preference Methods in Theory and Practice. Edited by Herriges, J. A., and C. L. Kling. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, R. L. and I. Strand. 2000. The Extent of Information: Its Relevance for Random Utility Models. Land Economics 76(3):374–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoehn, J. P., T. Tomasi, F. Lupi, and H. Z. Chen. 1996. An Economic Model for Valuing Recreational Angling Resources in Michigan. Michigan State University, Report to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karou, Y. S1995. Measuring Marine Recreation Benefits of Water Quality Improvements by the Nested Random Utility Model. Resource and Energy Economics 17:119–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolstad, C. D. 2000. Environmental Economics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laitila, T. 1999. Estimation of Combined Site-Choice and Trip-Frequency Models of Recreational Demand Using Choice-Based and On site Samples. Economic Letters 64:17–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Layman, R. C, J. R. Boyce, and K. R. Criddle. 1996. Economic Valuation of the Chinook Salmon Sport Fishery of the Gulkana River, Alaska, under Current and Alternate Management Plans. Land Economics 72(1):113–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J. B., and R. G. Walsh. 1997. Recreation Economic Decisions: Comparing Benefits and Costs. State College, PA: Venture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupi, F., and P. M. Feather. 1998. Using Partial Aggregation to Reduce Bias in Random Utility Travel Cost Models. Water Resources Research 34(12):3595–3603.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, K. E. 1986. The Damages to Recreational Activities from PCB’s in New Bedford Harbor. University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics. Report prepared for the Ocean Assessment Division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, K. E. 1992. On site Time in the Demand for Recreation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 74:918–925.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, K E., I. Strand, and L. Blake-Hedges. 1995. Random Utility Models of Recreational Fishing: Catching Fish Using a Poisson Process. Marine Resource Economics 10:247–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, K. E., and I. E. Strand. 1981. Measuring the Cost of Time in Recreation Demand Analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 63:153–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, K. E. and I. E. Strand. 1994. The Economic Value of Mid and South Atlantic Sportfishing. University of Maryland, Report to the U.S. EPA and NOAA. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFadden, D. 2001. Economic Choices. American Economic Review 91(3):351–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendelsohn, R., J. Hof, G. Peterson, and R. Johnson. 1992. Measuring Recreation Values with Multiple Destination Trips. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 74:926–933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, M. and M. Needelman. 1997. The Welfare Effects of Toxic Contamination in Freshwater Fish. Land Economics 73:211–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morey, E. 1981. The Demand for Site-Specific Recreational Activities: A Characteristics Approach. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 8:345–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morey, E. 1999. Two Rums Uncloaked: Nested-Logit Models of Site Choice and Nested-Logit Models of Participation and Site Choice. Chapter 3 in Valuing Recreation and the Environment: Revealed Preference Methods in Theory and Practice. Edited by Herriges, J. A., and C. L. Kling. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morey, E., R. D. Rowe, and M. Watson. 1993. A Repeated Nested-Logit Model of Atlantic Salmon Fishing. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75:578–592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, C, B. Sohngen, and L. Pendelton. 2001. Valuing Water Quality Advisories and Beach Amenities in the Great Lakes. Water Resources Research 37(10):2583–2590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozuna, T., and I. A. Gomez 1994. Estimating a System of Recreation Demand Function Using a Seemingly Unrelated Poisson Regression Approach. Review of Economics and Statistics 76:356–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, G. R. 1991. A Note on Choice of Residential Location in Travel Cost Demand Models. Land Economics 67(3):360–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, G. R., and M J. Kealy. 1992. Randomly Drawn Opportunity Sets in a Random Utility Model of Lake Recreation. Land Economics 68(1):93–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, G. R., and M. Needelman. 1992. Site Aggregation in a Random Utility Model of Recreation. Land Economics 68(4):418–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, G. R., and A. J. Wilson. 1997. Incidental and Joint Consumption in Recreation Demand. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 26:1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, G. R., and A. B. Hauber. 1998. Spatial Boundaries and Choice Set Definition in a Random Utility Model of Recreation Demand. Land Economics 74(1):32–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, G R., P. M. Jakus, and T. Tomasi. 1999. A Comparison of Welfare Estimates from Four Models for Linking Seasonal Recreational Trips to Multinomial Logit Models of Site Choice. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 38:143–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, G. R., D. M. Massey, and T. Tomasi. 1999. Familiar and Favorite Sites in a Random Utility Model of Beach Recreation. Marine Resource Economics 14:299–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, G. R., and D. M. Massey. 2003. A RUM Model of Beach Recreation. In The New Economics of Outdoor Recreation. Edited by Hanely, N., W. D. Shaw, R. E. Wright, and J. C. Coleman. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, G. R., A. J. Plantinga, and K. J. Boyle. 2000. Narrow Choice Sets in a Random Utility Model of Recreation Demand. Land Economics 76(1):86–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, T., W. L. Adamowicz, and P. C. Boxall. 1995. Influence of Choice Set Considerations in Modeling the Benefits from Improved Water Quality. Water Resources Research 31(7):T781–1787.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phaneuf, D. J., C. L. Kling, and J. Herriges. 2000. Estimation and Welfare Calculation in a Generalized Corner Solution Model With an Application to Recreation Demand. Review of Economics and Statistics 82:83–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phaneuf, D. J. and V. K. Smith. 2002. Recreation Demand Models. Unpublished manuscript, North Carolina State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Randall, A. 1994. A Difficulty with the Travel Cost Method. Land Economics 70(1):88–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, D. 1988. ‘On site Samples’ Regression Problems of Nonnegative Integers, Truncation, and Enodgenous Stratification. Journal of Econometrics 37:211–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, W. D., and P. Jakus. 1996. Travel Cost Models of the Demand for Rock Climbing. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 25(2):133–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, W. D., and M. Ozog. 1999. Modeling Overnight Recreation Trip Choice: Application of a Repeated Multinomial Logit Model. Environmental and Resource Economics 13(4):397–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shonkwiler, J. S. 1999. Recreation Demand Systems for Multiple Site Count Data Travel Cost Models. Chapter 9 in Valuing Recreation and the Environment: Revealed Preference Methods in Theory and Practice. Edited by Herriges, J. A., and C. L. Kling. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shonkwiler, J. S. and W. D. Shaw. 1996. Hurdle Count-Data Models in recreation Demand Analysis. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 21(2):210–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siderelis, C, G. Brothers, and P. Rea. 1995. A Boating Choice Model for the Valuation of Lake Access. Journal of Leisure Research 27(3):264–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siderelis, C, and R. Moore. 1995. Outdoor Recreation Net Benefits of Rail-Trails. Journal of Leisure Research 27(4):344–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V. K., W. H. Desvousges, and M. P. McGivney. 1983. The Opportunity Cost of Travel Time in Recreation Demand Models. Land Economics 59(3):259–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V. K, and W. H. Desvousges. 1985. The Generalized Travel Cost Model and Water Quality Benefits: A Reconsideration. Southern Economics Journal 52(2):371–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V. K., W. H. Desvousges, and M. P. McGivney. 1983. Estimating Water Quality Benefits: An Econometric Analysis. Southern Economic Journal 50(2):422–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sohngen, B. 2000. The Value of Day Trips to Lake Erie Beaches. Unpublished report, Dept. of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics, Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Train, K. E. 1999. Mixed Logit Models for Recreation Demand. Chapter 4 in Valuing Recreation and the Environment: Revealed Preference Methods in Theory and Practice. Edited by Herriges, J. A., and C. L. Kling. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, F. A., and D. Beal. 2000. Valuing Nature with Travel Cost Models: A Manuel. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Delaware, USA

    George R. Parsons

Authors
  1. George R. Parsons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Rocky Mountain Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Fort Collins, CO, USA

    Patricia A. Champ  & Thomas C. Brown  & 

  2. Department of Resource Economics & Policy, University of Maine, USA

    Kevin J. Boyle (Libra Professor of Environmental Economics) (Libra Professor of Environmental Economics)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Parsons, G.R. (2003). The Travel Cost Model. In: Champ, P.A., Boyle, K.J., Brown, T.C. (eds) A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Resources, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0826-6_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0826-6_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-1445-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-007-0826-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation