Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Valuation of National Park System Visitation: The Efficient Use of Count Data Models, Meta-Analysis, and Secondary Visitor Survey Data

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The National Park Service (NPS) currently manages a large and diverse system of park units nationwide which received an estimated 279 million recreational visits in 2011. This article uses park visitor data collected by the NPS Visitor Services Project to estimate a consistent set of count data travel cost models of park visitor willingness to pay (WTP). Models were estimated using 58 different park unit survey datasets. WTP estimates for these 58 park surveys were used within a meta-regression analysis model to predict average and total WTP for NPS recreational visitation system-wide. Estimated WTP per NPS visit in 2011 averaged $102 system-wide, and ranged across park units from $67 to $288. Total 2011 visitor WTP for the NPS system is estimated at $28.5 billion with a 95% confidence interval of $19.7–$43.1 billion. The estimation of a meta-regression model using consistently collected data and identical specification of visitor WTP models greatly reduces problems common to meta-regression models, including sample selection bias, primary data heterogeneity, and heteroskedasticity, as well as some aspects of panel effects. The article provides the first estimate of total annual NPS visitor WTP within the literature directly based on NPS visitor survey data.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AAA (2012) Your driving costs: 2012 edition. http://newsroom.aaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/YourDrivingCosts2012.pdf

  • Aiken R, LaRouche GP (2003) Net economic values for wildlife-related recreation in 2001. Report 2001–3, Division of Federal Aid, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington DC

  • Almansa C, Martinez-Paz J (2011) What weight should be assigned to future environmental impacts? A probabilistic cost benefit analysis using recent advances on discounting. Sci Total Environ 409(2011):1305–1314

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Amoako-Tuffour J, Martínez-Espiñeira R (2012) Leisure and the net opportunity cost of travel time in recreation demand analysis: an application to Gros Morne National Park. J Appl Econ 15(1):25–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhat M (2003) Application of non-market valuation to the Florida Keys marine reserve management. J Environ Manage 67(4):315–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop R, Brown C, Welsh M, Boyle K (1989) Grand Canyon recreation and Glen Canyon dam operations: an economic evaluation. In: Boyle KJ, Heekin T (eds) Western regional research project W-133, benefits and costs in natural resource planning, interim report 2. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maine, Orono, pp 407–435

  • Bowker J, English D, Donovan J (1996) Toward a value for guided rafting on southern rivers. J Agric Appl Econ 28(2):423–432

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowker J, Starbuck C, English D, Bergstrom J, Rosenberger R, McCollum D (2009) Estimating the net economic value of national forest recreation: an application of the national visitor use monitoring data base. Faculty Series Working Paper, FS 09-02. University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Athens

  • Cameron A, Trivedi P (1998) Regression analysis of count data. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen P (2003) Topics in meta-analysis: a literature survey. Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillman D (2000) Mail and internet surveys—the tailored design method. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillman D (2007) Mail and internet surveys: 2nd edition, 2007 edition. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan G, Champ P (2009) The economic benefits of Elk viewing at the Jewell Meadows Wildlife Area in Oregon. Hum Dimens Wildl 2009:51–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffield J, Neher C, Patterson D (2009) National park service benefit transfers data base: analysis and results. Report for Dr. Bruce Peacock. National Park Service Department of Environmental Quality, Fort Collins

  • Englin J, Shonkwiler J (1995a) Estimating social welfare using count data models: an application under conditions of endogenous stratification and truncation. Rev Econ Stat 1995:104–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Englin J, Shonkwiller J (1995b) Modeling recreation demand in the presence of unobservable travel costs: toward a travel price model. J Environ Econ Manage 29(3):168–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freund R, Littell R (1986) SAS system for regression, 1986th edn. SAS Institute Inc, Cary

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass GV (1976) Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educ Resour 5(10):3–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagerty D, Moeltner K (2005) Specification of driving costs in models of recreation demand. Land Econ 81(1):127–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardner J, McKenney B (2006) The U.S. national park system: an economic asset at risk. Report for the National Parks Conservation Association, Washington DC

  • Haspel A, Johnson F (1982) Multiple destination trip bias in recreation benefit estimation. Land Econ 58(3):364–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heberling M, Templeton J (2009) Estimating the economic value of national parks with count data models using on-site, secondary data: the case of the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve. Environ Manage 43:619–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellerstein D, Mendelsohn R (1993) A theoretical foundation for count data models. Am J Agric Econ 1993:604–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaval P, Loomis J (2003) Updated outdoor recreation use values with emphasis on national park recreation. National Park Service, Fort Collins

    Google Scholar 

  • Kling C (1989) A note on the welfare effects of omitting substitute prices and qualities from travel cost mode. Land Econ 65(3):290–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kling C, Sexton R (1990) Bootstrapping in applied welfare analysis. Am J Agric Econ 72(2):406–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leggett C, Kleckner K, Boyle K, Duffield J, Mitchell R (2003) Social desirability bias in contingent valuation surveys administered through in-person interviews. Land Econ 79(4):561–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liston-Heyes C, Heyes A (1999) Recreational benefits from the Dartmoor National Park. J Environ Manage 55(2):69–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loomis J (2003) Travel cost demand model based river recreation benefit estimates with on-site and household surveys: comparative results and a correction procedure. Water Resour Res 39(4):1105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loomis J (2005) Updated outdoor recreation use values on national forests and other public lands. USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report PNW-GTR-658

  • Markowski M, Unsworth R, Paterson R, Boyle K (1997) A database of sport fishing values, Industrial Economics Inc., Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC

  • Martínez-Espiñeira R, Amoako-Tuffour J (2008) Recreation demand analysis under truncation, overdispersion, and endogenous stratification: an application to Gros Morne National Park. J Environ Manage 88:1320–1332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Espiñeira R, Amoako-Tuffour J (2009) Multiple-destination and multi-purpose trip effects in the analysis of the demand for trips to a remote recreational site. Environ Manage 43(6):1146–1161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNair D (1993) RPA recreation values database.USDA Forest Service, RPA Program, Washington, DC; Contract 43-4568-3-1191

  • Moeltner K, Woodward R (2009) Meta-functional benefit transfer for wetland valuation: making the most of small samples. Environ Resour Econ 42:89–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Park Service (2012) NPS Public Use Statistics. http://www.nature.nps.gov/stats/

  • Nelson JP, Kennedy PE (2008) The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and resource economics: an assessment. Working paper. Department of Economics, Penn State University, University Park

  • Ovaskainen V, Neuvonen M, Pouta E (2012) Modelling recreation demand with respondent-reported driving cost and stated cost of travel time: a Finnish case. J For Econ 18(4):303–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips C (2003) Quantifying and reporting uncertainty from systematic errors. Epidemiology 14(4):459–466

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson R, Loomis J (2005) Climate change and recreational benefits in an Alpine National Park. J Leis Res 37:307–320

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal D (1987) The necessity for substitute prices in recreation demand analyses. Am J Agric Econ 69(4):828–837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute Inc. (2008) SAS/STAT 9.2 users guide. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary

  • Shaw D (1988) On-site samples regression: problems of non-negative integers, truncation and endogenous stratification. J Econ 1988:211–223

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith VK, Kaoru Y (1990) Signals or noise? Explaining the variation in recreation benefit estimates. Am J Agric Econ 72(2):419–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorg C, Loomis J (1984) Empirical estimates of amenity forest values: a comparative review. General Technical Report RM-107, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins

  • Stanley TD, Jarrell S (1989) Meta-regression analysis: a quantitative method of literature surveys. J Econ Surv 19(3):299–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Stapler R, Johnston R (2009) Meta-analysis, benefit transfer, and methodological covariates: implications for transfer error. Environ Resour Econ 42:227–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2013) Occupational employment statistics. http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#00-0000. Accessed 3/4/2013

  • U.S. Department of the Interior (1995) The national parks: index 1995. National Park Service, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Vose D (2002) Risk analysis: a quantitative guide, 2nd edn. Wiley, London

    Google Scholar 

  • VSP (Visitor Services Project) (2007) The visitor services project brochure. University of Idaho, College of Natural Resources, Park Studies Unit, Moscow. http://www.psu.uidaho.edu/vsp.htm

  • Walsh R, Johnson D, McKean J (1988) Review of outdoor recreation demand studies with nonmarket benefit estimates, 1968–1988. Technical Report 54, Colorado Water Resources Research Institute, Colorado State University, Fort Collins

  • Walsh R, Johnson D, McKean J (1992) Benefit transfer of outdoor recreation demand studies, 1968–1988. Water Resour Res 28(1992):707–713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward F, Loomis J (1986) The travel cost demand model as an environmental policy assessment tool: a review of literature. West J Agric Econ 11(2):164–178

    Google Scholar 

  • White H (1980) A heteroscedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroscedasticity. Econometrica 48(4):817–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Primary funding for this study was a research grant from the National Park Service Social Science Program. The study benefited substantially from comments on a draft report by Dr. Bruce Peacock. Assistance in data collection and organization and editing was given by Joel Dalenberg and Amy Harvey. Butch Street of the NPS provided data on the NPS system. The authors wish to thank Daniel Hellerstein and Jeffery Englin as well as two other anonymous reviewers for many helpful comments and suggestions. Of course, any errors or omissions are solely the responsibility of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematical Sciences, The University of Montana, Mathematics Building, Missoula, MT, 59812, USA

    Christopher Neher, John Duffield & David Patterson

Authors
  1. Christopher Neher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John Duffield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Patterson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher Neher.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Neher, C., Duffield, J. & Patterson, D. Valuation of National Park System Visitation: The Efficient Use of Count Data Models, Meta-Analysis, and Secondary Visitor Survey Data. Environmental Management 52, 683–698 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-013-0080-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-013-0080-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation