Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Meta-Analytic Benefit Transfer of Outdoor Recreation Economic Values: Testing Out-of-Sample Convergent Validity

  • Published:
Environmental and Resource Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A benefit transfer approach to recreationeconomic valuation using meta-analysis isexamined. Since the meta- regression modeltakes into account some of the study specificeffects on willingness to pay (WTP) estimates,benefit transfer using meta-analysis couldyield a valid WTP estimate of unstudiedrecreation resources. The convergent validityof the meta-analytic benefit transfer is testedusing out-of-sample original studies from theU.S. The analyses are performed usingpercentage difference, paired t-test,regression and correlation tests. The testsreveal mixed results on convergence betweenestimated WTP using meta-analytic benefittransfer function (BTF) and out-of-sampleoriginal WTP values. There is a fairly highpercentage difference between the estimated andoriginal WTP values (80–88%), and the meandifferences are statistically significant asshown by paired t-tests. However, correlationand regression results consistently showsignificant positive relationships betweennational BTF estimated and original WTP valuesindicating some level of convergence. Theresults show that the national BTF outperformthe regional BTF indicating a potential of thenational BTF for recreation benefit transferwhen a “first best” primary valuation study isnot affordable.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AEI, UI and NA (1998), Outdoor Recreation use and Value on Lower Snake River Reservoirs. Report prepared for the Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, Agricultural Enterprise Inc. (AEI), University of Idaho (UI) and Normandean Associates (NA), Walla Walla, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, I. and A. Jones. Forthcoming. Contrasting Conventional with Multi-Level Modeling Approaches to Meta-Analysis: Expectation Consistency in UK Woodland Recreation Values. Forthcoming, Land Economics.

  • Bergland, O., K. Magnussen and S. Navrud (1995), Benefit Transfer: Testing for Accuracy and Reliability. Discussion Paper #D-03/1995, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Agricultural University of Norway.

  • Bijmolt, T.H.A. and R.G.M. Pieters (2001), ‘Meta-Analysis in Marketing when Studies Contain Multiple Measurements’, Marketing Letters 12(2), 157-169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, K. and J. Bergstrom (1992), ‘Benefit Transfer Studies: Myths, Pragmatism, and Idealism’, Water Resource Research 28(3), 657-663.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, K., G. Poe and J. Bergstrom (1994), ‘What DoWe Know about Groundwater Values? Preliminary Implications from a Meta Analysis of Contingent-Valuation Studies’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76, 1055-1061.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, K.J., B. Roach, D.G. Waddington, J. Clark and B. Lange (1998), 1996 Net Economic Values for Bass, Trout and Walleye Fishing, Deer, Elk and Moose Hunting, and Wildlife Watching-Addendum to the 1996 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

  • Brookshire, D.S. and H.R. Neill (1992), ‘Benefit Transfer: Conceptual and Empirical Issues’, Water Resources Research 28(3), 651-655.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer R. and F.A. Spaninks (1999), ‘The Validity of Environmental Benefits Transfer: Further Empirical Testing’, Environmental and Resource Economics 14, 95-117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer, R., I.H. Langford, I.J. Bateman and R.K. Turner (1999), ‘A Meta-Analysis of Wetland Contingent Valuation Studies’, Regional Environmental Change 1(1), 47-57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, R.T., J. Wright, A. Alberini, N. Carson and N. Flores (1994), A Bibliography of Contingent Valuation Studies and Papers. La Jolla, CA, NRDA, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, R.T., N.E. Flores, K.M. Martin and J.L.Wright (1996), ‘Contingent Valuation and Revealed Preference Methodologies: Comparing the Estimates for Quasi-public Goods’, Land Economics 72(1), 80-99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, R.T., N.E. Flores and N.F. Meade (2001), ‘Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence’, Environment and Resource Economics 19, 173-210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty, K. and J.E. Keith (2000), ‘Estimating the Recreation Demand and Economic Value of Mountain Biking in Moab, Utah: An Application of Count Data Models’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 43(4), 461-469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, J.C. (2000), ‘Nonparametric and Semi-Nonparametric Recreational Demand Analysis’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 82, 451-462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coupal, R.H., C. Bastian, J. May, and D.T. Taylor (1998), The Economic Benefits of Snowmobiling in Wyoming: A Travel Cost Approach with Market Segmentation. An unpublished paper, Dept. of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Wyoming.

  • Creel, M. and J. Loomis (1991), ‘Confidence Intervals for Welfare Measures with Application to a Problem of Truncated Counts’, Review of Economics and Statistics 63(2), 370-373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desvousges, W.H., M.C. Naughton and G.R. Parsons (1992), ‘Benefit Transfer: Conceptual Problems in EstimatingWater Quality Benefits Using Existing Studies’, Water Resource Research 28, 675-683.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desvousges, W.H., F.R. Johnson, and H.S. Banzhaf (1998), Environmental Policy Analysis With Limited Information: Principles and Applications of the Transfer Method. Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downing, M. and T. Jr. Ozuna (1996), ‘Testing the Reliability of the Benefit Function Transfer Approach’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30, 316-322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, P. and D. Hellerstein (1997), ‘Calibrating Benefit Function Transfer to Assess the Conservation Reserve Program’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79, 151-162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, A.M. (1984), ‘On the Tactics of Benefit Estimates Under Executive Order 12291’, in V.K. Smith, ed., Environmental Policy Under Regean's Executive Order: Role of Benefit Cost Analysis. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, pp. 167-186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass, G.V. (1976), ‘Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research’, Educational Researcher 5, 3-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass, G.V., B. McGraw and M.S. Smith (1981), Meta-Analysis in Social Research. Sage Publications Inc., California & London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W.H. (1997), Econometric Analysis (Third Edition). Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackett, S.C. (1999), The Recreational Economic Benefits from Wilderness Visitation in the Eastern Trinity Alps. An unpublished paper, School of Business and Economics, California State University-Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanemann, W.M. (1991), ‘Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ’, The American Economic Review 81(3), 635-647.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, L., P. Feather and D. Shank (1999), ‘Valuation of Agriculture's Multi-site Environmental Impacts: An Application of Pheasant Hunting’, Agricultural and Resource Economics Review (October), 199-207.

  • Hilger, J.R. (1998), A Bivariate Compound Poisson Application: The Welfare Effects of Forest Fire on Wilderness Day-Hikers. An unpublished thesis, Resource and Applied Economics, University of Nevada, Reno.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, J.L. and J.J. Louviere (1993), ‘Testing Predicted Choices Against Observations in Probabilistic Discrete Choice Models’, Marketing Science 12(3), 270-279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchhoff, S., B.G. Colby and J.R. LaFrance (1997), ‘Evaluating the Performance of Benefit Transfer: An Empirical Inquiry’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 33, 75-93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krupnick, A.J. (1993), ‘Benefit Transfer and Environmental Improvements’, Resources 110(Winter), 1-6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leeworthy, V.R. and J.M. Bowker (1997), Nonmarket Economic User Values of the Florida Keys/Key West. The Study Conducted in Conjunction with US Forest Service, The University of Georgia, The Nature Conservancy, NOAA, and Monroe County Tourism Development Council.

  • Loomis, J.B. (1992), ‘The Evolution of a More Rigorous Approach to Benefit Transfer: Benefit Function Transfer’, Water Resources Research 28, 701-705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J.B. (2001), Final Snake River Contingency Value Methodology Study Report. The Report Submitted to the Wyoming Bureau of Land Management, Wyoming.

  • Loomis, J. and D. White (1996), ‘Economic Benefits of Rare and Endangered Species: Summary and Meta-analysis’, Ecological Economics 18, 197-206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J.B. and R.G. Walsh (1997), Recreation Economic Decisions: Comparing Benefits and Costs (Second Edition). Venture Publishing, Inc., Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J., B. Roach, F. Ward and R. Ready (1995), ‘Testing the Transferability of Recreation Demand Models Across Regions: A Study of Corps of Engineers Reservoirs’, Water Resources Research 31, 721-730.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J.B., R. Rosenberger and R.K. Shrestha (1999), Updated Estimates of Recreation Values for the RPA Program by Assessment Region and Use of Meta-Analysis for Recreation Benefit Transfer. Final Report for the USDA Forest Service, Colorado State University, Fort Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J.B., S. Yorizane and D. Larson (2000), ‘Testing Significance of Multi-Destination and Multi-Purpose Trip Effects in a Travel Cost Method Demand Model for Whale Watching Trips’, Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 29(2), 183-191.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacNair, D. (1993), 1993 RPA Recreation Values Database. USDA Forest Service, RPA Program, Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markowski, M., R. Unsworth, R. Paterson and K. Boyle (1997), A Database of Sport Fishing Values. Industrial Economics Inc. prepared for the Economics Division, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.

  • McConnell, K.E. (1992), ‘Model Building and Judgment: Implication for Benefit Transfer With Travel Cost Models’, Water Resources Research 28(3), 695-700.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moeltner, K. (1998), Demand for Hiking In the Alpine Lakes Wilderness-A Travel Cost Analysis. An unpublished paper, Dept. of Economics, University of Washington.

  • Piper, S. (1998), ‘Modeling Recreation Decisions and Estimating the Benefits on North Dakota River Recreation’, Rivers 6, 251-258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roach, B., K. Boyle, J. Bergstrom and R. Reiling (1999), ‘The Effect of Instream Flows on Whitewater Visitation and Consumer Surplus: A Contingent Valuation Application to the Dean River, Maine’, Rivers 7, 11-20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberger R. and J. Loomis (2000), ‘Panel Stratification of Meta-Analysis of Economic Studies: An Investigation of Its Effects in the Recreation Valuation Literature’, Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 32(3), 459-470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirkin, R.M. (1995), Statistics for the Social Sciences. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V.K. (1992), ‘On Separating Defensible Benefit Transfer From “Smoke and Mirrors”’, Water Resources Research 28(3), 685-694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V.K. and J. Huang (1995), ‘Can Markets Value Air Quality? A Meta-Analysis of Hedonic Property Value Models’, Journal of Political Economy 103, 209-227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V.K. and Y. Kaoru (1990), ‘Signals or Noise?: Explaining the Variation in Recreation Benefit Estimates’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 72, 419-433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V.K. and L. Osborne (1996), ‘Do Contingent Valuation Estimates Pass a Scope Test?: A Meta-analysis’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 31, 287-301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V.K., G.V. Houtven and S.K. Pattanayak (2002), ‘Benefit Transfer via Preference Calibration: Prudential Algebra for Policy’, Land Economics 78(1), 132-152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanley, T.D. (2001). ‘Wheat from Chaff: Meta-Analysis as Quantitative Literature Review’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 15(3), 131-150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturtevant, L.A., F.R. Johnson and W.H. Desvousges (1998), A Meta-analysis of Recreational Fishing, Unpublished Manuscript. Triangle Economic Research, Durham, NC.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Water Resources Council (1983), Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines for Water and Related Land Resources Implementation Studies. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Water Resources Council (1979), ‘Procedures for Evaluation of National Economic Development (NED) Benefits and Costs in Water Resources Planning (Level C)’, Federal Register 44(243), 72892-72976.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S.Water Resources Council (1973), ‘Principles, Standards, and Procedures for Water and Related Land Resource Planning’, Federal Register 38(174), Part III.

  • Valdes, S. (1995), Non-market Valuation of Recreational Resources: Testing Temporal Reliability in Contingent Valuation Studies and an Explanation of Benefit Transfer Procedures with Discrete Choice Models. An unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Maryland.

  • Walsh, R.G., D.M. Johnson and J.R. McKean (1989), ‘Issues in Nonmarket Valuation and Policy Application: A Retrospective Glance’, Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 14, 78-188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, R.G., D.M. Johnson and J.R. McKean (1992), ‘Benefit Transfer of Outdoor Recreation Demand Studies: 1968-1988’, Water Resources Research 28, 707-713.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willig, R.D (1976), ‘Consumer Surplus Without Apology’, The American Economic Review 66(4), 589-597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, R.T. and Y.S. Wui (2000), ‘The Economic Value of Wetland Services: A Meta-analysis’, Ecological Economics 37, 257-270.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, P.O. Box 110410, Gainesville, FL, 32611, U.S.A.

    Ram K. Shrestha

  2. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 80523, U.S.A

    John B. Loomis

Authors
  1. Ram K. Shrestha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John B. Loomis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shrestha, R.K., Loomis, J.B. Meta-Analytic Benefit Transfer of Outdoor Recreation Economic Values: Testing Out-of-Sample Convergent Validity. Environmental and Resource Economics 25, 79–100 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023658501572

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023658501572

Search

Navigation