by Virginia McConnell and Margaret Walls
The authors review is distinguished from other surveys of open space that have been done in recent years by its broad focus on non-use values for all types of open space, and because it reviews primarily, although not exclusively, studies of applications in North America.
Open space provides a range of benefits to citizens of a community, beyond the benefits that accrue to private landowners. Parks and natural areas can be used for recreation; wetlands and forests supply storm-water drainage and wildlife habitat; farms and forests provide aesthetic benefits to surrounding residents. And in rapidly growing urban and suburban areas, any preserved land can offer relief from congestion and other negative effects of development.
It is one thing to recognize that open space provides these benefits but quite another to place a monetary value on them. To make important policy and planning decisions about zoning, restrictions on land use, government purchase of lands for parks, and similar initiatives, however, estimates of preferences and even dollar values can be essential. In this study, we review more than 60 published articles that have attempted to estimate the value of different types of open space.
The two major approaches for estimating open space value from the economics literature are the focus of this study: revealed preference methods and stated preference methods. In the first category are hedonic property value studies in which the open space value is inferred by estimating the sales price or value of a property as a function of measures of proximity to open space and other property and neighborhood characteristics. In the second are studies that use carefully designed surveys to elicit preferences or values households place on various types of open space amenities. Both contingent valuation and contingent choice studies are reviewed.
Both the revealed and stated preference studies generally show that there is value to preserving most types of open space land uses, but the values tend to vary widely with the size of the area, the proximity of the open space to residences, the type of open space, and the method of analysis. One conclusion we draw from this review is that the extant literature tends to be case study specific. However, it is possible to draw conclusions from the range of studies about the direction of particular effects, how values vary by location and other influences, and the differences among the methodologies used to estimate values. In addition, we suggest areas where additional research is needed to improve valuation estimates. We also conclude that more analysis is needed about how to conduct studies with broader applicability.
Published January 01, 2005
The phenomena of thru-hiking has been on a dramatic rise, spurring hikers to venture onto increasingly remote and challenging trails over extended periods of time. Despite the recent popularity of thru-hiking, the field remains relatively unstudied. In recreation, the expectations held beforehand have been linked to perceptions after an activity, but this has not been explored in thru-hiking.
This study evaluated pack weight to understand the limits of long-term load carriage. Participants were Appalachian Trail hikers who attempted to complete the entire trail in the 2012 season.
The purpose of this research was to examine the outcomes prompting hiking along the Appalachian Trail (AT).
In recent years, fat bikes have become a popular option for mountain bikers. A fat bike is a mountain bike equipped with tires ranging from 9.3 – 10.1 cm wide, twice as wide as a traditional mountain bike tire (Barber, 2014). This allows them to be ridden at an inflation pressure as low as 27579 Pascal (4 PSI). The wide surface area, and low inflation pressure, of these tires allows for excellent handling of the bicycle while riding over sand, mud, and snow. It is difficult, if not impossible, for a traditional mountain bike to ride over such surfaces.