A Comparative Analysis for Wilderness User Fee Policy

Dados Bibliográficos

ID10137633
AutoresWilliam A Leuschner (Department of Forestry Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, autor correspondente), Philip S Cook (0000-0002-2902-2030, National Wildlife Federation), Joseph W Roggenbuck (Department of Forestry Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University), Richard G Oderwald (Department of Forestry Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University)
Ano1987
Volume19
Fascículo2
Páginas101-114
Data de publicação1987-04-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoJournal of Leisure Research (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0022-2216 • E-ISSN: 2159-6417
EditoraTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/00222216.1987.11969681
OpenAlexW1492599664
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas10
Referências citadas4

Users at both a fee and a nonfee backcountry area were surveyed between June and September, 1985. User characteristics, trip characteristics, and TCM demand functions all indicated fees did not cause a difference between populations or trip behavior. Responses indicated that users would rather not pay fees than pay them, but that behavior and use patterns would not be drastically altered if fees were implemented. About three-fourths of the respondents reported fees did not affect their choice of area and that they had complied with fees. We conclude a strong case is made for intensive investigation of a wilderness fee system

Advertising · Affect (linguistics · Business · Economics · Political science · Public economics · Recreation · User fee · Wilderness · Ecology · Law · Marketing · Psychology · Recreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management · Transportation and Mobility Innovations · Urban Transport and Accessibility