Subject Areas : Agricultural Economics Research

Mehrdad Moradi ¹ , Mehriyar Sadrolashrafi ² , Reza Moghaddasi ³ , سعید یزدانی ⁴

1 - دانش آموخته دکتری دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم وتحقیقات، گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، تهران، ایران
2 - دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم وتحقیقات، گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، تهران، ایران
3 - دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم وتحقیقات، گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، تهران، ایران
4 - استاد گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم وتحقیقات، تهران، ایران

Received: 2012-05-04 Accepted : 2013-01-01 Published : 2013-02-03

Keywords: Contingent Valuation, Forests Park, Recreational value, Yasouj,

Abstract :

Forests play a significant role in human beings welfare. Most of forest benefits either is valued in low price is or isnt accounted at all. This under-valuation often leads to inadequate allocation of resources and incorrect forest management and planning for forest maintance. Recreational use of forest is one of the important benefits of forest. Kohgiluye and Boyer Ahmad province has vast forests which have provided suitable grounds for recreational use of people in society. The goal of this study has been to estimate recreational value of yasouj forest park and the amount of visitor’s willingness to payment. The data for this research has been collected by occasional sampling and from questionnaires based on contingent valuation (CV) and double-bounded dichotomous choice (DC) from 188 visitors of yasouj forest park. Logit model was used to determine effective factors in individual willing to pay (WTP), based on maximum likelihood method. The findings show that 86.9 percent of visitors have accepted to pay for coming to this forest park. Results show that bid, income, education and household size variables have significant effect on WTP; however, gender and age variables statistically dont have such effect. The mean amount of willingness to pay is 992.73 RLS per visitor and total annual recreational value for yasouj forest park is 7.43 Billion RLS.

References:

1-اميرنژاد ح. 1384. تعيين ارزش كل اقتصادي اكوسيستم جنگل‌هاي شمال ايران با تأكيد بر ارزشگذاري زيست محيطي ـ اكولوژيكي و ارزش‌هاي حفاظتي . رساله دوره دكتري اقتصاد كشاورزي . دانشكده كشاورزي . دانشگاه تربيت مدرس . 269ص
2-بي‌نام. 1383ب. دستورالعمل و شرح خدمات گروه جنگلداري. دفتر جنگل‌هاي خارج از شمال. سازمان جنگل‌ها، مراتع و آبخيزداري كشور. وزارت جهاد كشاورزي
3-تاجداري پ .١٣8٦ . مقدمه اي بر آمارگيري نمونه اي . چاپ اول . انتشارات اتا . تهران . 251 ص
4-مصدق ا .1382. تخريب محيط زيسا جهاني وآينده جهان. نشرعلوم كشاورزي . چاپ اول . تهران . 198ص


5-Arrow K, Solow R, Portney P, Leamer E, Radner R and Schuman H . 1993 . Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation. Fed. Regist, 58(10): 4602-4614.
6-Asafu-Adjaye J and Topsuwan S. 2008. A Contingent Valuation Study of Scuba Case Study in Mu Ko Similan Marin National Park. Thailand, Tourism Management. 29: 1122-1130.
7-Bartczak A, Lidjem H, Navrud S, Zandersen M and Zylick T. 2008 . Valuing Forest Recreation on the National Level in Atransition Economy: The Case of Poland. Forest Policy and Economics.10:467-472.
8-Bernath K. and Roschewitz A. 2007. Recreational Benefits of Urban Forests: Explaining Visitors Willingness to Pay in the Context of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Journal of Environmental Management. 60:1-11.
9-Chen Z.M, Chen G.Q, Chen B, Zhou J.B, Yang Z.F and Zhou Y. 2009. Net Ecosystem Services Value of Wetland: Environmental Economic Account. Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simulate. 14: 2837- 2843.
10-Dubgaard A. 1998. Economic Value for Recreational Benefits from Danish Forests. In: Dabbert, S, Dubgaard A, Slangen, L, Whitby M. (Eds.). The Economics of Landscape and Wildlife Conservation. CAB International. Wallingford.
11-Freer-Smith M.S.J, Broadmeadow J.M and Lyneh B. 2007. Forestry and Climate Change. Cabi Head Office. Noswhorthy Way Oxfordshire. Uk.
12-Garrod G and Willis K. 1997. The Recreational Value of Tropical Forests in Malaysia. Journal of World Forest Resource Management. 8: 183-201.
13-Hanemann W. M. 1994.Valuing the Environment Through Contingent Valuation. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 8(4): 19-43.
14-Howarth B.R and Farber S. 2002. Accounting for the Value of Ecosystem Services. Ecological Economics. 41: 421-429.
15-Judge G.G, Hill R.C, Griffithes W.E, Lukepohl H and Lee T.C. 1988. The Theory and Practice of Econometrics. 2nd Edition. Wiley. New York. USA.
16-Kluvánková T. 1999. Sustainable Tourism in the Mala Fatra National Park. the Slovak Republic. International Journal of Sustainable Development. 2 (2): 323–340.
17-Lee C and Han S. 2002. Estimating the Use and Preservation Values of National Parks Tourism Resources Using a Contingent Valuation Method. Tourism Management. 23: 531-540.
18-Lehtonen E.J, Kuuluvainen E, Pouta M, Rekola T and Li C. 2003. Non-Market Benefits of Forest Conservation in Southern Finland. Environmental Science and Policy. 6: 195-204.
19-Loomis J.B and Ekstrand E. 1998. Alternative Approaches for Incorporating Respondent Uncertainty when Estimating Willingness to Pay: the Case of Mexican Spotted Owl. Ecological Economics. 27: 29-41.
20-Loomis J.B, Gonzalez A.M, Gonzalez-Caban A. 2007. Spatial Limits of the Tcmrevisited: Island Effects. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics. Colorado State University.
21-Maddala G.S. 1991. Introduction to Econometrics. 2nd Edition. Macmillan. New York.
22-Mathur A.S and Sachdeva A.S. 2003. Towards an Economic Approach to Sustainable Forest Development. Working Paper Series. Paper No:2.
23-Mitchell R.C and Carson R.T. 1989. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington. DC: Resource for the Future.
24-Pearce D.W and Turner R.K. 1990. Economics of Natural Resources and the
Environment. Harvester Wheatsheaf. Hertfordshire.
25-Scarpa R, Hutchinson W.G, Chilton S.M and Buongiorno J. 2000. Importance of Forest Attributes in the Willingness to Pay for Recreation: A Contingent Valuation Study of Irish Forests: Forest Policy and Economics. 1: 315-329.
26-Schaeffer P.V. 2008. Thoughts Concerning the Economic Valuation of Landscapes. Journal of Environmental Management. 89:146-154.
27-Tyrväinen L. 2001. Economic Valuation of Urban Forest Benefits in Finland. Journal of
Environmental Management. 62 (1): 75–92.
28-Venkatachalam L.2004. The Contingent Valuation Method: A Review. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 24: 89-124
30-Voget K. A, Honea J, Voget D. J, Andreu M, Edmonds R, Sigurdardottir R and Patel_Weynand T. 2006. Forest and Socity: Sustainability and Life Cycles of Forest in Human Landscapes. Cromwell Press. Trowbridge.
31-Willis K.G, Garrod G, Scarpa R, Powe N.A, Lovett A, Bateman I.J, Hanley N and MacMillan D. 2003. The Social and Environmental Benefits of Forests in Great Britain. Social & Environmental Benefits of Forestry Phase 2. Report to Forestry Commission. Edinburgh.