Valuing the Recreational Benefits From the Creation of Nature Reserves in Irish Forests

By Riccardo Scarpa, Susan Chilton, W. Hutchinson, Joseph Buongiorno. 2000

114 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0127547e8220a0fc71693df32839870bb8697fa1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Global and Planetary Change

Citations in the corpus

Modelling and mapping spatial heterogeneity in forest recreation services (2013, background): “This effect is also found in an Irish study on willingness to pay for creation of nature reserves in Ireland (Scarpa et al., 2000).”
Valuing biodiversity enhancement in New Zealand's planted forests: Socioeconomic and spatial determinants of willingness-to-pay (2014, background): “For example, Scarpa et al. (2000) applied contingent valuation (CV) and found that creating nature reserves in forests in Ireland, which contributes to preserving biodiversity, was significantly and positively associated with the economic welfare of forest visitors.”
Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research directions (2003, result): “For example, generalisation of the results of Bateman, Diamond, Langford and Jones (1996) indicates that in Oxfordshire, England the value of a forest established for recreational use would be $2,290 per hectare per annum (see also Garrod and Willis, 1997; Scarpa et al., 2000).”
Not just minor forest products: The economic rationale for the consumption of wild food plants by subsistence farmers (2006, background): “…of the value of the standing forest, together with its value as a carbon sink (Solberg, 1997), its watershed services (Guo et al., 2001), the value of its biological diversity (Pearce, 2001), as a tourism destination (Scarpa et al., 2000) and its option value (Forsyth, 2000), among others.”
A meta-analysis of contingent valuation forest studies (2010, background): “The largest number of observations from one single study is 19 and comes from Scarpa et al. (2000), while the minimum is one single observation (from eleven different studies).”