Estimating Recreation Value of Forest Parks of Mashhad: Application of Conditional Valuation Method

Subject Areas : Agricultural Economics Research

H. Khaksar Astaneh ¹ , M. Daneshvar ² , V. Kalateh Arabi ³ , S.M.R. Akbari ⁴

1 - عضو هئیت علمی گروه اقتصاد شهری جهاد دانشگاهی مشهد
2 - دانشیار گروه اقتصادکشاورزی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
3 - دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان
4 - عضو باشگاه پژوهشگران جوان/دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد مرودشت

Received: 2015-12-18 Accepted : 2015-12-18 Published : 2011-06-22

Keywords: willingness to pay - conditional valuation - Logit model - Forest Park - Mashhad,

Abstract :

In this study, recreation value of forest parks of Mashhad and willingness to pay (WTP) of visitors were determined by using conditional valuation method (CVM) and dichotomous choice questionnaire. Factors affecting visitor's willingness to pay were determined with Logit model. Results of the study showed that 87 percent of respondents were ready to pay for recreational use of forest parks of Mashhad. Average willingness to pay was 1287 rails for each visit and total recreational value per year was more than 6300 Million Rails. Results indicated that family size, income and importance of natural resources protection were among significant factors affecting willingness to pay  

References:

1. Amigues J, Boulatoff C and Desaigues B .2002. The benefits andcosts of riparian analysis habitat preservation: a willingness toaccept / willingness to pay contingent valuation approach.Ecological Economics. 43: 17-31.

2. Amir Nejad, H., 1385. Total Value of Forest Eco-System inNorthern Iran, with an Emphasis on the Valuation of

Environmental, Ecological and Conservation Values, Ph.D.Thesis Department of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural

Economics Department, Tarbiat Modarres University, Iran.

3. Amir Nejad, H., 1386. Economy, Natural Resources,Publications, Eternal, Forests, First Printing.

4. Amir Nejad, H., and Rafie, H., 1388. Economic Valuation ofEnvironment (Case Study of Forest Tourism Area of AbbasAbad, Mazandaran Province), Agri. Sciences and NaturalResources, NO.3.

5. Amir Nejad, H., Khalilian, S. And Osare, M., 1375. ProtectiveValue and Walk Park Forest SiSangan Noshahr People UsingWillingness to Pay, Journal of Natural Resources andConstruction, No.72.

6. Asheim G., Green B .2002. National accounting: Why and How?Environment and Development. Economics. 5: 25-48.

7. Bakhshaei, A., 1353. Introduction of National Parks and Forests.Tehran University Press.

8. Dehghanian, S., And Faraj-Zadeh, Z., 1381. EconomicEnvironment for No- Economists, Author: John Asofi - Ajaei.,Ferdowsi University, Mashhad, Iran.

9. Dehghanian, S., Kochaki, A., and Kolahi Ahari, A., 1374.Environmental Economics, University of Ferdowsi, Mashhad,

Iran.

10. Echeverria J, Hanrahan M and Solorzano R .1995. Valuation ofnon-priced amenities provided bythe biological resources withinthe Monteverdi cloud forest preserve. Costa Rica. EcologicalEconomics. 13: 43-52.

11. Emami Meibodi, A., and Ghazi, M., 1388. Estimate theRecreational Value in Tehran Saee Parks of Using Contingent

Valuation, Journal of Economic Studies, 36(12): 187-202.85

12. Guo Z , Xiao X , Gan Y and Zheng Y .2001. Ecosystemfunctions, services and their values cases study in Xingshan

country of China. Ecological Economics. 38: 141-154.13. Gurluk S .2006. The estimation of ecosystem services value in theregion of Misi rural development project: Results from acontingent valuation survey. Journal of Forest Policy and

Economics. 9: 209-218.

14. Hanemann W.M. 1994. Valuing the environment throughcontingent valuation, Journal of Economic Perspectives. 8(4): 19-43.

15. inLebanon: An application of contingent valuation method forconservation. Ecological Economics61: 315-322

16. Judge G, Hill C, Griffiths W, Lee T, and Lutkepol H .1982.Introduction to the theory and practice of econometrics. NewYork : Wiley

17. Khodaverdi Zadeh, M., Hayati, B., and Kavoosi, M., 1387. EastVillage Tourist Outing Kandovan Estimated Value UsingContingent Valuation, Natural Science, Environmental, Vol. 5,NO. 4.

18. Khorshiddoust A.M. 2005. Contingent valuation in estimating thewillingness to pay for environmental conservation in Tabriz, Iran.Environmental Studies. 30: 12-21

19. Kristrom B. 1999. Valuing forests, Stockholm: MBG press StLouis, Sweden

20. Lee C, and Han S. 2002. Estimating the use and preservationvalues of national parks tourism resources using a contingent.Tourism Management, 23: 531-540valuation method.

21. Leinhoop N and MacMillan D. 2007. Valuing wilderness inIceland: Estimation of WTA and WTP using the market stallapproach to contingent valuation. Land Use Policy. 24: 289- 295.

22. Mirzaei, M., 1379. Vegetation and Ecological Value of SemidesertArea Southwest of Qom (the Panther Valley), Thesis PlantSciences, Tarbiyat Madras University.

23. Reynisdottir M, Song H and Agrusa J. 2008. Willingness to Payentrance fees to natural attractions: An Icelandic case study.Tourism Management .29:1076-1083.

24. Salazar S and Mendez L .2005. Estimating then on-marketbenefits of an urban park: Does proximity matter? Land UsePolicy. 241: 296-305.

25. Sattout E.J, Talhouk S.N and Caligari P.D.S. 2007. Economicvalue of cedar relics

26. Togridou A. Hovardas T and Pantis J.D. 2006. Determinants ofvisitor’s willingness to pay for the National Marine Park ofZakynthos, Greece. Ecological Economics. 60:308-319.

27. Torras M. 2000. The total economic value of Amazonianforestation. 1978-1993. Ecological Economics. 33: 283-297.

28. Vaze P. 1998. System of environment and economic accounting

(SEEA). London: ONS, U.K.