The Use of Benefit Transfer to Estimate the Recreational and Touristic Value of Two Wooded Areas in Tuscany
Affiliation(s)
Department of Agricultural and Forest Economics, Engineering, Sciences and Technologies, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. Faculty of Architecture Art and Design, Notre Dame University-Louaize, Zouk Mosbeh, Lebanon.
Department of Agricultural and Forest Economics, Engineering, Sciences and Technologies, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. Faculty of Architecture Art and Design, Notre Dame University-Louaize, Zouk Mosbeh, Lebanon.
ABSTRACT
The holistic role of forests going beyond the economic function, identified in timber production, substantiates the evaluation of forests’ social and environmental dimensions. Consequently, biodiversity, landscape, hydro-geological security, and maintenance of cultures and traditions are among the manifold issues to be addressed in dealing with forests. Touristic and recreational role of forests is also associated with the disproportionate development of human activities, sources of pollution often correlated to a reduced quality of life. This paper aims at applying the benefit transfer methodology to estimate (from a financial point of view) the recreational and touristic value of wooded areas. The proposed approach relies on an extensive literature review including earlier published books, project’ reports, scientific journals, and conference proceedings addressing the economic evaluation of forests. The reviewed methodologies are then rationally synthesized, adapted, and applied on two case studies in Tuscany, in an attempt to assign a value to forest’s systems; however, only the recreational and touristic dimensions are considered. The ultimate purpose of this work is to emphasize aspects that were not yet properly considered in the financial appraisal of wooded areas, for a balanced management of natural resources avoiding deterioration and neglect.
The holistic role of forests going beyond the economic function, identified in timber production, substantiates the evaluation of forests’ social and environmental dimensions. Consequently, biodiversity, landscape, hydro-geological security, and maintenance of cultures and traditions are among the manifold issues to be addressed in dealing with forests. Touristic and recreational role of forests is also associated with the disproportionate development of human activities, sources of pollution often correlated to a reduced quality of life. This paper aims at applying the benefit transfer methodology to estimate (from a financial point of view) the recreational and touristic value of wooded areas. The proposed approach relies on an extensive literature review including earlier published books, project’ reports, scientific journals, and conference proceedings addressing the economic evaluation of forests. The reviewed methodologies are then rationally synthesized, adapted, and applied on two case studies in Tuscany, in an attempt to assign a value to forest’s systems; however, only the recreational and touristic dimensions are considered. The ultimate purpose of this work is to emphasize aspects that were not yet properly considered in the financial appraisal of wooded areas, for a balanced management of natural resources avoiding deterioration and neglect.
Cite this paper
F. Riccioli, R. Fratini, J. Asmar and T. Asmar, "The Use of Benefit Transfer to Estimate the Recreational and Touristic Value of Two Wooded Areas in Tuscany," Journal of Service Science and Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, 2012, pp. 14-19. doi: 10.4236/jssm.2012.51002.
F. Riccioli, R. Fratini, J. Asmar and T. Asmar, "The Use of Benefit Transfer to Estimate the Recreational and Touristic Value of Two Wooded Areas in Tuscany," Journal of Service Science and Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, 2012, pp. 14-19. doi: 10.4236/jssm.2012.51002.
References
[1] M. Clawson and J. L. Knetch, “Economics of Outdoor Recreation,” The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1966. [2] J. P. Hoehn and A. Randall, “A Satisfactory Benefit Cost Indicator from Contingent Valuation,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1987, pp. 226-247. doi:10.1016/0095-0696(87)90018-0 [3] D. Pearce and C. Pearce, “The Value of Forest Ecosystems: A Report to the Secretariat Convention on Biological Diversity,” University College London, London, 2001. [4] D. Pettenella and L. Secco, “Prospettive di Mercato per la Produzione Fuori Foresta,” Foreste ed Alberi Oggi, Vol. 128, 2006, pp. 15-20. [5] S. Navrud and R. Brouwer, “Good Practise Guidlelines in Benefis Transfer of Forest Externalities,” COST Action E45, European Forest Externalities, Euroforex, 2007. [6] T. Tempesta and F. Marangon, “Stima del Valore Economico Totale dei Paesaggi Forestali Italiani Tramite Valutazione Contingente,” Genio Rurale, Vol. 11, 2004, pp. 32-45. [7] T. L. Saaty, “The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority, Setting and Resource Allocation,” Mac Graw-Hill, New York, 1980. [8] V. Gallerani, G. Zanni and D. Viaggi, “Valutazione di Impatto Ambientale,” Manuale di Estimo, Mc Graw-Hill, Milano, 2004, pp. 260-265. [9] P. Nijkamp and P. Rietveldt, “Multiple Objective Decision Analysis in Regional Economic,” Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Amsterdam, 1996. [10] J. Malczewski, “GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis,” John Winley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1999. [11] R. K. Shrestha and J. B. Loomis, “Testing a Meta-Analy- sis Model for Benefit Transfer in International Outdoor Recreation,” Ecological Economics, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2001, pp. 67-83. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(01)00193-8 [12] O. Ciancio, P. Corona, M. Marinelli and D. Pettenella, “Valutazione dei Danni da Incendi Boschivi,” Collaborazione con Accademia Italiana di Scienze Forestali e Corpo Forestale dello Stato, Coppini, Firenze, 2007. [13] 13D. N. Barton, “The Transferability of Benefit Transfer: Contingent Valuation of Water Quality Improvements in Costa Rica,” Ecological Economics, Vol. 42, No. 1-2, 2002, pp. 147-164. [14] A. Marinelli, L. Casini and D. Romano, “Valutazione Economica Dell’impatto Aggregato e dei Benefici Diretti Della Ricreazione All’aperto di un Parco Naturale Della Toscana,” Genio Rurale, Vol. 9, 1990, pp. 51-58. [15] M. Clawson, “Methods of Measuring the Demand and Value of Outdoor Recreation,” Resource of the Future, Washington D.C., 1959. [16] M. Merlo, “Una Valutazione Della Funzione Ricreazionale Dei Boschi,” Rivista di Economia Agraria, Vol. 37, No. 2, 1982, pp. 385-397. [17] M. Rossi, “La Valutazione Economica Della Grande Escursione Appenninica in Casentino: Un’applicazione del Trave Cost Method,” University of Florence, Florence, 1991. [18] A. Marinelli and S. Romano, “La Valutazione Economica dei Benefici e Dell’impatto Aggregato Della Caccia Nella Provincia di Firenze,” Giunti Editore, Firenze, 1997. [19] D. Pearce, K. Turner and I. Bateman, “Economia Ambientale,” Editore il Mulino, 2003 [20] E. Kula, “Economics of Natural Resources, the Environment and Policies,” Chapman & Hall, London, 1994. doi:10.1007/978-94-011-6037-7
[1] M. Clawson and J. L. Knetch, “Economics of Outdoor Recreation,” The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1966. [2] J. P. Hoehn and A. Randall, “A Satisfactory Benefit Cost Indicator from Contingent Valuation,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1987, pp. 226-247. doi:10.1016/0095-0696(87)90018-0 [3] D. Pearce and C. Pearce, “The Value of Forest Ecosystems: A Report to the Secretariat Convention on Biological Diversity,” University College London, London, 2001. [4] D. Pettenella and L. Secco, “Prospettive di Mercato per la Produzione Fuori Foresta,” Foreste ed Alberi Oggi, Vol. 128, 2006, pp. 15-20. [5] S. Navrud and R. Brouwer, “Good Practise Guidlelines in Benefis Transfer of Forest Externalities,” COST Action E45, European Forest Externalities, Euroforex, 2007. [6] T. Tempesta and F. Marangon, “Stima del Valore Economico Totale dei Paesaggi Forestali Italiani Tramite Valutazione Contingente,” Genio Rurale, Vol. 11, 2004, pp. 32-45. [7] T. L. Saaty, “The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority, Setting and Resource Allocation,” Mac Graw-Hill, New York, 1980. [8] V. Gallerani, G. Zanni and D. Viaggi, “Valutazione di Impatto Ambientale,” Manuale di Estimo, Mc Graw-Hill, Milano, 2004, pp. 260-265. [9] P. Nijkamp and P. Rietveldt, “Multiple Objective Decision Analysis in Regional Economic,” Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Amsterdam, 1996. [10] J. Malczewski, “GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis,” John Winley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1999. [11] R. K. Shrestha and J. B. Loomis, “Testing a Meta-Analy- sis Model for Benefit Transfer in International Outdoor Recreation,” Ecological Economics, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2001, pp. 67-83. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(01)00193-8 [12] O. Ciancio, P. Corona, M. Marinelli and D. Pettenella, “Valutazione dei Danni da Incendi Boschivi,” Collaborazione con Accademia Italiana di Scienze Forestali e Corpo Forestale dello Stato, Coppini, Firenze, 2007. [13] 13D. N. Barton, “The Transferability of Benefit Transfer: Contingent Valuation of Water Quality Improvements in Costa Rica,” Ecological Economics, Vol. 42, No. 1-2, 2002, pp. 147-164. [14] A. Marinelli, L. Casini and D. Romano, “Valutazione Economica Dell’impatto Aggregato e dei Benefici Diretti Della Ricreazione All’aperto di un Parco Naturale Della Toscana,” Genio Rurale, Vol. 9, 1990, pp. 51-58. [15] M. Clawson, “Methods of Measuring the Demand and Value of Outdoor Recreation,” Resource of the Future, Washington D.C., 1959. [16] M. Merlo, “Una Valutazione Della Funzione Ricreazionale Dei Boschi,” Rivista di Economia Agraria, Vol. 37, No. 2, 1982, pp. 385-397. [17] M. Rossi, “La Valutazione Economica Della Grande Escursione Appenninica in Casentino: Un’applicazione del Trave Cost Method,” University of Florence, Florence, 1991. [18] A. Marinelli and S. Romano, “La Valutazione Economica dei Benefici e Dell’impatto Aggregato Della Caccia Nella Provincia di Firenze,” Giunti Editore, Firenze, 1997. [19] D. Pearce, K. Turner and I. Bateman, “Economia Ambientale,” Editore il Mulino, 2003 [20] E. Kula, “Economics of Natural Resources, the Environment and Policies,” Chapman & Hall, London, 1994. doi:10.1007/978-94-011-6037-7