1988American Journal of Agricultural EconomicsRequires access

Selection and Recreation Demand

V. Kerry Smith

Open publisher page 71 citations

Abstract

Abstract This article compares five methods for estimating travel cost recreation demand models with microdata. The models are distinguished by their treatment of selection effects that arise with on‐site surveys. The comparison considers adjusting for selection effects in a variety of ways, including single and double selection rule models. Both parameter and consumer surplus estimates were evaluated. The findings indicate that the treatment of selection effects alone was not important for this case. However, the choice of an estimator did lead to large variations in per trip consumer surplus estimates.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract This article compares five methods for estimating travel cost recreation demand models with microdata. The models are distinguished by their treatment of selection effects that arise with on‐site surveys. The comparison considers adjusting for selection effects in a variety of ways, including single and double selection rule models. Both parameter and consumer surplus estimates were evaluated. The findings indicate that the treatment of selection effects alone was not important for this case. However, the choice of an estimator did lead to large variations in per trip consumer surplus estimates.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 71 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract This article compares five methods for estimating travel cost recreation demand models with microdata. The models are distinguished by their treatment of selection effects that arise with on‐site surveys. The comparison considers adjusting for selection effects in a variety of ways, including single and double selection rule models. Both parameter and consumer surplus estimates were evaluated. The findings indicate that the treatment of selection effects alone was not important for this case. However, the choice of an estimator did lead to large variations in per trip consumer surplus estimates.

Key concepts: Recreation, Microdata (statistics), Selection (genetic algorithm), Economic surplus, Variety (cybernetics), Estimator, Econometrics, Economics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Selection and Recreation Demand — Research Paper | ScholarLens