Bartczak, Anna and Lindhjem, Henrik and Navrud, Ståle and Zandersen, Marianne and Zylicz, Tomasz (2008): Valuing forest recreation on the national level in a transition economy: The case of Poland. Published in: Forest Policy and Economics , Vol. 7-8, No. 10 : pp. 467-472.
Recreation benefits constitute a substantial part of the total economic value of forests, and are important for the choice of multi-functional forest policies. The application of methods valuing such benefits is in its infancy in transition economies in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), so value estimates for policy use are sometimes transferred from Western Europe proportionally scaled down by GDP. However, little is known about how recreation values vary with income, and one risks underestimating benefits in CEE. This paper reports the findings of the first comprehensive, national-level study in any CEE country estimating annual and per trip forest recreation values in Poland using the Travel Cost (TC) and Contingent Valuation (CV) methods. Two in-person interview surveys of forest recreation behaviour were carried out. The first was administered onsite in ten representative forest areas, and the other in the homes of a national sample of adult Poles. Results show that forest recreation is highly valued in Poland, at Euros 0.64 – 6.93 per trip per person, depending on the valuation method. Both trip frequency and per trip values are higher than the average in Western Europe, despite a lower income level. Thus, a simple GDP-adjusted transfer from Western Europe would substantially undervalue forest recreation in Poland. Further, a comparison of TC consumer surplus estimates and GDP/capita in Europe shows no clear relationship, indicating that a range of cultural, institutional and other factors may be important
Grogger, J. T., Carson, R. T., 1991. Models for truncated counts. Journal of Applied Econometrics 6, 225-238.
Grossman, G., Kruger, A., 1995. Economic growth and the environment. Quarterly Journal of Economics 110(353-377).
Hynes, S., Hanley, N., 2006. Preservation versus development on Irish rivers: Whitewater kayaking and hydro power in Ireland. . Kyoto; Japan
Hökby, S., Söderqvist, T., 2003. Elasticities of demand and willingness to pay for environmental services in Sweden. Environmental and Resource Economics 26(3), 361-383.
Haab, T. C., McConnell, K. E., 2002. Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources: The econometrics of non-market valuation. Edward Elgar.
Jensen, F. S., Koch, N. E., 1997. Friluftsliv i skovene 1976/77 - 1993/94 [Recreation in forests 1976/77 - 1993/94]. 1-215. Forskningsserien nr. 20, Forskningscentret for Skov and Landskab, Hørsholm, DK.,
Kriström, B., 1997. Spike models in contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79(3), 1013-1023.
Kriström, B., Riera, P., 1996. Is the income elasticity of environmental improvements less than one? Environmental and Resource Economics 7, 45-55.
Krupnick, A., Harrison, K., Nickell, E., Toman, M., 1996. The value of health benefits from ambient air quality improvements in Central and Eastern Europe: An exercise in benefits transfer. Environmental and Resource Economics 7(4), 307-332.
Lindhjem, H., 2007. 20 Years of stated preference valuation of non-timber benefits from Fennoscandian forests: A meta-analysis. Journal of Forest Economics 12, 251-277.
Lindhjem, H., Navrud, S., In press. How Reliable are Meta-Analyses for International Benefit Transfer? Ecological Economics.
Markowska, A., Zylicz, T., 1999. Costing an international public good: The case of the Baltic Sea. Ecological Economics 30, 301-316.
Moons, E., Loomis, J. B., Proost, S., Eggermont, K., Hermy, M., 2001. Travel cost and time measurement in travel cost models. Working Paper Series no 2001-22, Katolieke Universiteit Leuven, Faculty of Economics and applied economic sciences.
Parsons, G. R. and Wilson, A. 1997. Incidental and joint consumption in recreation demand. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 24, 1-6.
Randall, A., 1994. A Difficulty with the Travel Cost Method. Land Economics 70(1), 88-96.
Ready, R., Navrud, S., 2006. International benefit transfer: Methods and validity tests. Ecological Economics 60, 429-434.
Scarpa, R., Chilton, S. M., Hutchinson, W. G., Buongiorno, J., 2000. Valuing the recreational benefits from the creation of nature reserves in Irish forests. Ecological Economics 33(2), 237-250.
SEPA, 2006. An instrument for assessing the quality of environmental valuation studies. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.
Shaw, W. D. and Feather, P., 1999 Possibilities for including the opportunity cost of time in recreation demand systems. Land Economics 75, 592-602.
Tyrväinen, L. 2001. Economic valuation of urban forest benefits in Finland. Journal of Environmental Management 62(1), 75-92.
UNECE/FAO, 2005. European Forest Sector Outlook Study. 1960 – 2000 – 2020. Main report. Geneva
Ward, F. A., Beal, D., 2003. Valuing nature with travel cost models: A Manual. Edward Elgar.
Willis, K. G., 1991. The recreational value of the forestry commission estate in Great Britain: A Clawson-Knetsch travel cost analysis Scottish Journal of Political Economy 38, 58-75.
Willis, K. G., Benson, J. F., 1989. Recreational values of forests. Forestry 62, 93-110.
Willis, K. G., Garrod, G., Scarpa, R., Powe, N. A., Lovett, A., Bateman, I. J., Hanley, N., MacMillan, D., 2003. The social and environmental benfits of forests in Great Britain. Social & Environmental Benefits of Forestry Phase 2:, Report to Forestry Commission, Edinburgh,
Zandersen, M., 2005. Valuing Forest Recreation in Europe: Time and Spatial Considerations. PhD, Hamburg University: pp.
Zandersen, M., Termansen, M., Jensen, F. S., 2007. Testing Benefits Transfer of Forest Recreation Values over a 20-year time Horizon Land Economics 83(3), 412-440.
Zandersen, M., Tol, R. S. J., In press. A Meta-Analysis of Forest Recreation Values in Europe. Journal of Forest Economics.
Zylicz, T., 2000. Costing Nature in a Transition Economy. Case Studies in Poland. Edward Elgar, Chelthenham.