A Comparative Analysis for Wilderness User Fee Policy

Datos Bibliográficos

ID10137633
AutoresWilliam A Leuschner (Department of Forestry Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, autor de correspondencia), 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)
Año1987
Volumen19
Número2
Páginas101-114
Fecha de publicación1987-04-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaJournal of Leisure Research (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0022-2216 • E-ISSN: 2159-6417
EditorialTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/00222216.1987.11969681
OpenAlexW1492599664
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas10
Referencias 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