-Download PDF-

SEEFOR 3 (2): 97-101
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15177/seefor.12-11  

Original scientific paper

 

Contingency Valuation of Croatian Arboretum Opeka


Stjepan Posavec 1*, Karlo Beljan 1, Nina Herceg 2, Špela Pezdevšek Malovrh 3


1 University of Zagreb, Faculty of Forestry, Department of Forest Inventory and Management, Zagreb, Croatia
2 Kralja Tomislava 17, 42 220 Novi Marof, Croatia
3 University of Ljubljana, Biotechnical Faculty, Department of Forestry and Renewable Forest Resources, Ljubljana, Slovenia

* Corresponding author: e-mail: sposavec@sumfak.hr 

Citation:
POSAVEC S, BELJAN K, HERCEG N, MALOVRH Š 2012 Contingency Valuation of Croatian Arboretum Opeka. South-east Eur for 3 (2): 97-101. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15177/seefor.12-11 


Cited by:        CrossRef        Google Scholar


Abstract

Background and Purpose: Social aspects of forestry have always been an important factor of forest usage and management, and therefore have significant influence on its sustainability. Non-wood forest functions such as recreation, tourism, aesthetic and educational factors influence development of rural areas. Contingent valuation method has rarely been used for evaluation of protected forest areas. The aim of the article is to estimate the amount of money visitors are willing to pay for nature’s resources preservation in the arboretum Opeka in the North-West Croatia.
Material and Methods: Opeka Arboretum is situated in the Vinica municipality in northern Croatia. Located in a large park surrounding a manor, Opeka arboretum, with its 65 hectares is the largest of the three arboretums existing in Croatia today. The arboretum was founded in 1860 by the Count Marko Bombelles. Contingent valuation is a survey-based economic technique for the non-market valuation of resources, such as environmental preservation or the impact of contamination. It is also the approach that can generally be used to include what is usually referred to as the passive use component of the economic value of environmental goods.
Results and Conclusion: Willingness to pay for visitor’s use of the arboretum has been investigated using the survey and contingency valuation method on a sample of 53 respondents. Research results present high preference for arboretum benefits such as beauty of landscape, cultural and historical significance, recreation and health but low willingness to pay.

Keywords: contingency valuation, environmental economics, willingness to pay, arboretum Opeka



REFERENCES

  1. ROBBINS L 1932 An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science. Macmillan and Co., London, p 160.
  2. POSAVEC S, BELJAN K, LOVRIĆ M 2011 Model of compensation payment to the owners on Natura 2000 forest sites. Glas šum pokuse (44): 19-28
  3. FIGURIĆ M 1996 Uvod u ekonomiku šumskih resursa. Šumarski fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb,  p 244
  4. POSAVEC S, ŠEGOTIĆ K, ČAKLOVIĆ L 2006 Selection of biological parameters in the evaluation of natural resources. Period Biol 108 (6): 671-676
  5. SCHULZE WD, D’ARGE RC, BROOKSHIRE DS 1981 Valuing Environmental Commodities: Some Recent Experiments. Land Econ 57 (2): 151-172. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3145783
  6. MAJID I, SINDEN JA, RANDALL A 1983 Benefit Evaluation of Increments to Existing Systems of Public Facilities. Land Econ 59 (4): 377-392. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3145653
  7. SELLAR C, STOLL JR, CHAVAS JP 1985 Validation of Empirical Measures of Welfare Change: A Comparison of Nonmarket Techniques. Land Econ 61 (2): 156-175. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3145808
  8. BOYLE KJ 2003 Contingent valuation in practice. In: Champ PA, Boyle K, Brown TC (eds) A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Kluwer, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp 111-169. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0826-6_5
  9. BARRIO M, LOUREIRO ML 2010 A meta-analysis of contingent valuation forest studies. Ecol Econ 69 (5): 1023-1030. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.016
  10. MARUŠIĆ Z, HORAK S, NAVRUD S 2005 The economic value of coastal forests for tourism: A comparative study of three valuation methods. Tourism 53 (2): 41-52
  11. HORAK S 1998 The value of forests for coastal tourism in southern Croatia. Tourism 46 (2): 59-74
  12. KRIEGER D 2001 Economic Value of Forest Ecosystems. Ecosystem Health 7 (4): 284-296. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-0992.2001.01037.x
  13. HOLGÉN P, MATTSSON L, LI CZ 2000 Recreation values of boreal forest stand types and landscapes resulting from different silvicultural systems: an economic analysis. J Environ Manage 60 (2): 173-180. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jema.2000.0377
  14. MOGAS J, RIERA P, BENNETT JW 2006 A comparison of contingent valuation and choice modelling with second-order interactions. J Forest Econ 12 (1): 5-30 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfe.2005.11.001
  15. FIGURIĆ M 1996 Uvod u ekonomiku šumskih resursa. Šumarski fakultet, Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Zagreb, p 244
  16. POTOČIĆ Z 1980 Šumarska enciklopedija 1 A-Grad. Jugoslavenski leksikografski zavod, Zagreb, p 727
  17. Zakon o zaštiti prirode (Official Gazette No. 70/2005, 139/2008)
  18. LADIĆ V 2012 Destination management and destination managing problems – example Vinica County. Interdiscipl manage research 8: 167-178
  19. DUBERSTEIN JN, DESTEIGUER JE 2003 Contingent valuation and watershed management: a review of past uses and possible future applications. Proceedings of the First Interagency Conference on Research in the Watersheds, Benson, Arizona 749-753
  20. WEBER S, HORAK S, MARUSIC Z 2002 Valuation of environmental assets: A case of Croatian coastal forests. Tourism Review 57 (1-2): 22-28 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb058375
  21. PAGIOLA S 1999 Valuing the Benefits of Investments in Cultural Heritage: The Historic Core of Split. Environment Department, The World Bank, Washington D.C. Paper presented at the World Bank Economists' Forum Alexandria, May 3-4

 

© 2015 by the Croatian Forest Research Institute. This is an Open Access paper distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0).