Journal of Korean Society of Forest Science (한국산림과학회지)

Korean Society of Forest Science (한국산림과학회)
권호 표지

Estimating the Use and Preservation Values of Jirisan National Park Using a Dichotomous Contingent Valuation

  • Han, Sang-Yoel (Korea National Park Research Institute, Korea National Park Service)
  • Received : 2006.05.12
  • Accepted : 2006.06.23
  • Published : 2006.10.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This research was conducted to estimate the use and preservation values of Jirisan national park, using a dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Jirisan national park was estimated to have the use value of 6,377 won per visitor. In terms of preservation value was estimated 13,030 won per housed per year. The results of this research show that Jirisan national park generated considerable use and preservation values, exceeding far greater than current admission fees. The findings also indicate that the estimated economic value provides enough justification for the national park service to increase admission fees in order to maintain the quality of the natural environment. This result may contribute to guidance on the pricing policy of national park managers and practitioners, although public policy may be made in the political arena.

Keywords

References

  1. Bishop, R.C. and Heberlein, T.A. 1979. Measuring values of extramarket goods: are indirect measures biased?' American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 61(5): 926-930 https://doi.org/10.2307/3180348
  2. Capps, O . Jr, and Cramer. 1985. Analysis of food stamp participation using qualitative choice models. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67(1): 49-59 https://doi.org/10.2307/1240823
  3. Carson, R.T. and Mitchell, R.C. 1993. The value of clean water: The public's willingness to pay for boatable, fishable, and swimmable quality water. Water Resources Research, 29(July): 2445-2454 https://doi.org/10.1029/93WR00495
  4. Duffield, J.W. and Patterson, D.A. 1991. Inference and optimal design for a welfare measure in dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Land Economics 67: 225-239 https://doi.org/10.2307/3146413
  5. Forster, B.A. 1989. Valuing outdoor recreational activity: a methodological survey. Journal of Leisure Research, 21(2): 181-201 https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1989.11969798
  6. Greenley, D.A, Walsh, R.G. and Young, R.A. 1981. Option value: empirical evidence from a case study of recreation and water quality. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 96(November): 657-672 https://doi.org/10.2307/1880746
  7. Hanemann, W.M. 1984. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66(3): 332-34l https://doi.org/10.2307/1240800
  8. Hanernann, W.M. 1989. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete response data: reply. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 71(3): 332-341.
  9. Hanemann, W.M. 1994. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(4): 19-43 https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.8.4.19
  10. Hanemann, W.M., Loomis, J. and Kanninen, B. 1991. Statistical efficiency of double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 73(4): 1255-1263 https://doi.org/10.2307/1242453
  11. Korea National Park Service. 2005. 2004 Report of Korea National Parks. Seoul: government printers
  12. Laarman, J.G. and Gregersen, H.M. 1996. Pricing policy in nature-based tourism. Tourism Management, 17(4): 247-254 https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-5177(96)00016-7
  13. Lee, C.K. and Han, S.Y. 2002. Estimating the use and preservation values of national parks' tourism resources using a contingent valuation method. Tourism Management 23: 531-540 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(02)00010-9
  14. Lockwood, M. & Tracy, K. 1995. Nonmarket economic valuation of an urban recreation park. Journal of Lei-sure Research, 27(2): 155-168 https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1995.11949740
  15. Moore, S. and Carter, B. 1993. Ecotourism in the 21st Century. Tourism Management, 14(2): 123-130 https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-5177(93)90045-M
  16. Pindyck, R.S. and Rubinfeld, D. 1981. Econometric models and economic forecasts. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill
  17. Randall, A., Ives, B. and Eastman, C. 1974. Bidding games for valuation of aesthetic environmental improvements. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1(2): 132-149 https://doi.org/10.1016/0095-0696(74)90010-2
  18. Sellar, C., Chavas, J.P. and Stoll, J.R. 1986. Specification of the logit model: the case of valuation of nonmarket goods. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 13(4): 382-390 https://doi.org/10.1016/0095-0696(86)90007-0
  19. Seller, C., Stoll, J.R. and Chavas, J.P. 1985. Validation of empirical measures of welfare change: a comparison of nonmarket techniques. Land Economics, 61 (2): 156-175 https://doi.org/10.2307/3145808
  20. Sorg, C.F. and Nelson, L.J. 1987. Net economic value of waterfowl hunting in Idaho. Resource Bulletin RM14, Fort Collins, CO: USDA Forest Service
  21. Sorg, C.F., Loomis, L, Donnelly, D.M., Peterson, G. and Nelson, L.J. 1985. Net economic value of cold and warm water fishing in Idaho. Resource Bulletin RM11, Fort Collins, CO: USDA Forest Service
  22. Walsh, R.G. 1986. Recreation economic decisions: comparing benefits and costs. State College, PA: Ventur
  23. Walsh, R.G., Loomis, J.B. and Gillman, R.A. 1984. Valuing option, existence, and bequest demand for wilderness. Land Economics, 60(1): 14-29 https://doi.org/10.2307/3146089
  24. www.knps.or.kr