برآورد ارزش تفرجی روستای بند ارومیه به روش ارزشگذاری مشروط

محورهای موضوعی : فصلنامه علمی -پژوهشی تحقیقات اقتصاد کشاورزی

حسین راحلی ¹ (دانشجوی دکتری رشته اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس)
محمد خداوردیزاده ² (استادیار گروه اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه تبریز)
حامد نجفی علمدارلو ³ (دانشجوی دکتری رشته اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس)

تاریخ دریافت : 1394/09/29 تاریخ پذیرش : 1394/09/29 تاریخ انتشار : 1389/10/01

کلید واژه: تمایل به پرداخت, ارزشگذاری مشروط, الگوی لوجیت, ارزش تفرجی, روستای بند ارومیه,

چکیده مقاله :

روستای بند از توابع بخش مرکزی شهرستان ارومیه بهدلیل دارا بودن جاذبههای زیاد، از مناطق توریستی و گردشگری مهم کشور میباشد. لذا، مطالعهی ارزش تفرجی آن میتواند در پیشبینی نیازها و رفع کمبودها و توسعهی گردشگری در منطقه مؤثر باشد. هدف از این پژوهش برآورد ارزش تفرجی روستای بند ارومیه با استفاده از روش ارزشگذاری مشروط است. برای بررسی عوامل موثر بر میزان تمایل به پرداخت افراد، الگوی لوجیت به روش حداکثر راستنمایی برآورد گردید. دادههای مورد نیاز از راه تکمیل پرسشنامه و مصاحبهی حضوری با 140 بازدیدکننده از روستای یاد شده جمعآوری شد. نتایج نشان داد که 75 درصد بازدیدکنندگان، حاضر به پرداخت مبلغی جهت استفاده از این روستا میباشند. همچنین، متغیرهای تحصیلات، جنسیت، اندازهی خانوار، درآمد، میزان رضایت بازدیدکنندگان و قیمت پیشنهادی اثر معنیداری روی احتمال تمایل به پرداخت افراد دارند. میانگین تمایل به پرداخت افراد 6250 ریال و ارزش تفرجی سالانهی روستای بند ارومیه حدود 500 میلیون ریال برآورد گردید.  

چکیده انگلیسی:

Band village is located at Orumieh region in West Azerbaijan province is one of the important tourism and promenade zone in Iran. The aim of this paper is to estimate the Outdoor Recreation value of Band village with the use of contingent valuation method. To determine effective variables affecting willingness to pay of individuals, Logit model estimated with the use of maximum likelihood approach. Needed data were obtained through filling up questionnaires and interviewing with 140 individuals who visited the mentioned village. Results revealed that 75 percents of respondents were ready to pay for visiting the village. Also, results showed that factors affecting willingness to pay included education, revenue, gender, family size, and satisfaction degree of visitors. Mean Willingness to pay for each visitor per year was 6250 Rls. and annual outdoor recreation value of the village was amounted to 500 million Rls.  

منابع و مأخذ:

1- Amigues, j., Boulatoff, C. and Desaigues, B. 2002. The benefits and costs of

riparian analysis habitat preservation: a willingness to accept / willingness to

pay contingent valuation approach. Ecological Economics. 43(1): 17-31.

2- Amirnejad, H. 2007.Estimating the preservation value of Golestan National

Park of Iran by using individuals willing to pay. Journal of Agricultural

Economics. 1(3):175-188.

3- Amirnejad, H., Khalilian, S. and Assareh, M.H. 2006. Estimating the

existence value of north forests of Iran by using a contingent valuation method.

Ecological Economics. 58(4): 665-675.

4- Amirnejad, H., Khalilian, S. and Assareh, M.H. 2006. The preservation and

use values determination of Sisangan Forest Park, Nowshahr by using

individual’s willingness-to-pay. Pajouhesh Sazandeghi . 19(3):15-24. va

5- Asgari, A. and Mehrgan, N. 2001. Estimating of Individuals willingness to

pay of cultural- historic bequest using a contingent valuation method. An

Hamedan Ganjname case study. Journal of Economical Researches, 1(2): 93-

115.

6- Ashim, G.B. 2000. Green national accounting: Why and How? Environment

and Development Economics. 5(1): 25-48.

7- Dashti, Gh. and Sohrabi, F. 2009. Recreational value of Nabovat Park of

Karaj based on contingent valuation. Journal of the Iranian Natural Resources.

61(4): 921-932.

8- Dehghanian, S., Koocheki, A. and Kolahi Ahari, A. 1995. Environmental

Economics. Ferdowsi University Press.

9- Del Saz Salazar, S. and Marques, J. 2005. Valuing cultural heritage: The

social benefits of restoring and old Arab tower. Journal of Cultural Heritage.

6(1): 69–77.

10- Echeverria, J., Hanrahan, M. and Solorzano, R. 1995. Valuation of nonpriced

amenities provided by the biological resources within the monterverde

cloud forest preserve, Costa rica. Ecological Economics. 13: 43-52.

11- Guo, Z., Xiao, X. Gan, Y. and Zheng, Y. 2001. Ecosystem functions,

services and their values a case study in Xingshan country of China. Ecological

Economics. 38(1) : 141-154.

12- Haneman, W.M. 1984. Welfare evaluation in contingent valuation

experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural

Economics. 71(3): 332-341.

13- Howarth, B.R., and S. Farber. 2002. Accounting for the value of ecosystem

services. Ecological Economics. 41(3): 421-429.

14- Judge, G., C. Hill, W. Griffiths, T. Lee, and H. Lutkepol. 1982. Intruduction

to the theory and practice of econometrics. New York : Wiley.

Karimzadeghan, H. 1993. Bases of Environmental Economics. Nagshmehr

Press. Tehran.

15- Kavoosi Kelashemi, M., Shahbazi, M and Malekian, A.2009. Estimating the

Recreation Value of Promenades With the Use of Two- Stage Heckman

Method: ( Rasht Mohtasham Boostan Case Study). Journal of Agricultural

Economics Researches. 1(1): 137- 150.

16- Khodaverdizadeh, M., Hayati, B. and Kavoosi Kelashmi, M. 2008.

Estimating the Outdoor Recreation Value of Kandovan Tourism Village of East

Azarbayjan with the Use of Contingent Valuation Method. Environmental

Sciences. 5(4): 43-52.

17- Khodaverdizadeh, M., Raheli, H., Kavoosi Kelashemi, M., Rezazadeh, A.

and Khorrami, Sh. 2010. Application of two- stage heckman method in

determining recreational value of Oshtbin country. Journal of Rural &

Development. 13(1): 111-130. 

18- Khorshiddoust, A.M. 2004. Contingent valuation in estimating the

willingness to pay for environmental conservation in Tabriz. Environmental

Studies, 30(36): 13-20.

19- 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.

20- Molaei, M., Yazdani, S. and Sharzehi, Gh. 2009. Estimating preservation

value of Arasbaran forest ecosystem using contingent valuation. Journal of

Agricultural Economics. 3(2): 37-64.

21- Nabin Barala, M., Stern, J. and Ranju, B. 2008. Contingent valuation of

ecotourism in Annapurna conservation area, Nepal: Implications for sustainable

park finance and local development. Ecological Economics. 66(2 & 3):218 –

227.

22- Pagiola, S. 2001. Valuing the Benefits of investments in cultural heritage:

The historic core of split. In Paper presented at the international conference on

economic valuation of cultural heritage, Cagliari, 19–20.

23- Pedhazur, e. j. 1982. Multiple regression in behavioral research: explanation

and prediction. New York, Hok, Reinhart & Winston.

24- Reynisdottir, M., Song, H. and Agrusa, J. 2008. Willingness to pay entrance

fees to natural attractions: An Icelandic case study. Tourism Management.

29(6): 1076– 1083.

25- Thomas, H. and Christopher, B. 1997. Conjonint analysis of groundwater

protection programs. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 26(2): 229-

236.

26- Togridou, A., Hovardas, T. and Pantis, J. D. 2006. Determinants of visitors'

willingness to pay for the National Marine Park of Zakynthos, Greece.

Ecological Economics. 60(1):308 – 319.

27- Vaze, P. 1998. System of environment and economic accounting

(SEEA).Chapter 13, London: ONS, U.K.

28- Whister, D. 1999. An Introductory Guide to SHAZAM. www. Shazam.

Econ. ubc.Ca. Logit Test for Heteroskedasticity.

29- Whitehead, J. C. and Finney, S. 2003. Willingness to pay for submerged

maritime cultural resources. Journal of Cultural Economics. 27(4): 231–240.

30- Yazdani, S. and Abbasi, A. 2010. Estimating Economic and Environmental

Values of Forests: A Case Study of Kheirood Forest in Novshahr. . Journal of

Agricultural Economics Researches.2(3): 33-54.