Many types of recreation a c t i v i t i e s are possible in preserved
natural areas. They range from active to passive - for example,
from canoeing to picnicking - and from compatible to incompatible in terms of maintaining the degree of "naturalness" - for example, from wilderness bushwalking to four-wheel-drive-touring. Depending on the type of goals pursued by the managers of a preserved natural area and its physical characteristics, different patterns of
recreation will occur. For instance, a coastal area which has been
preserved primarily for existence and gene-pool benefits may exclude surfboard riders, whereas a specifically recreation oriented area would welcome visitors with such interests.
As was demonstrated in the Introduction, markets for
recreation in natural areas seldom occur,1argely because the benefit
provided is often d i f f i c u l t to price exclude. In addition,
governments may regard the jointness qualities of the benefit -
at least up to levels of congestion - and the possibility of monopoly
supply in cases where areas offer unique recreational attractions,
as sufficient reasons for th eir supplying natural areas for recreation
purposes. Together, these factors create a situation which
requires recreation benefit valuation to be carried out using techniques other than direct market observation, as can be used in the case of production benefits.
The f i r s t option available for such measurement is to exploit the relationships between recreation at natural areas with
marketed goods which are either substitutes or complements, given
141
for this type of measurement technique was outlined in Section 2.4.1. To carry out this technique i t is necessary f i r s t to
determine the exact nature of the relationship - i t can range from complementary, in the case of backpacks and tents for bushwalking"* in wilderness areas, to substitutive, in the case of owning a
pool instead of swimming in a natural lake. Of course, the degree of such relationships is very important to ensure an accurate
measurement of the benefit. Cl early,a swimming pool in the backyard is not a perfect substitute for a natural lake, but this may not be due to the inability of the pool recreation to substitute for the lake recreation - r a t h e r , i t may be due to the addition of other benefits, such as aesthetic benefits, to the pure swimming benefit in the case of natural lake use.
As mentioned in Section 3.2, benefits are often interrelated through the user, and this characteristic can be exploited when the analyst is required to value the total use experience involving
possibly aesthetic, health, educational as well as recreational benefit. For instance, the relationship between travel costs and the total
v i s i t benefit has been extensively used to value the participatory use of natural areas. This "travel cost" measurement method has been discussed in some detail in Sub-Section 2.4.2 and all that needs to be added at this stage is to reiterate that this method measures a l l the benefits gained by a visitor to a preserved natural area.
1 Note, however, that tents and backpacks are complementary goods to the whole bushwalking experience which almost certainly includes other benefits besides the pure recreation benefit.
The use of non-market valuation methods such as direct
questioning or iterative bidding is unlikely to be suitable for measuring recreation benefits when they are associated with other benefits,
because of the diffi cult y of explaining to respondents just what they are being asked to value and the uncertainty that respondents are actually separating the value of their recreation benefit
from the other benefit's values. However these hypothetical valuation methods have been used to measure the whole user experience, and
are thereforeComparable with the travel cost method. Because park fees can be used as an accepted mode of payment, the direct
questioning and iterative bidding methods seem well suited to this type of valuation task, but the use of a demand revealing process in a sub-sample "experiment" context, to provide a check for strategic bias in the main sample, would remain advisable.
4.5 HEALTH BENEFITS
During the twentieth century the incidence of many of the endemic diseases such as polio, smallpox and typhoid has decreased markedly. However, in their place have emerged the so-called
diseases of civilization - these are the stress related afflict ions such as heart diseases, high-blood pressure and some would argue, cancer. It is thought that the preservation of natural areas allows the city dweller to escape from his crowded urban environment and to enjoy the chance for healthy exercise in a clean environment.
Anon (1969) argues that there is a psychic, as well as a purely physical need of man for the preservation of natural areas, in that, in
143
addition to the physical exercise involved in act i vi t i es carried out in such areas, there is a degree of relaxation of the mind
involved. Indeed, many people use preserved areas not for exercise, but purely to "recharge their mental batteries".
Because health benefits are derived by participating users, the reasons why we generally do not observe markets for the health benefits of natural areas, and hence why we must rely on valuation techniques which are designed for non-marketed goods, are the same as those which were detailed in the previous section, and in the
Introduction, for the case of recreation benefits.
Where an individual is forced to stop work as a result of an illness which could have been prevented by his use of a preserved natural area, the value of his work - wages foregone ( i f the labour market is not severely distorted) - can be used as a lower bound measure of the health benefits of preservation. It is a lower bound measure because foregone wages are only one cost associated with an illness - i t does not include, for instance, the costs of pain
2
and suffering endured by the individual or his family and friends. "There appear to be very few substitute goods which
can be used for valuation purposes - with the possible exceptions of rather imperfect substitutes such as drugs and therapy -
2 One possibility for achieving a measure of the change in total
well-being resulting from the health benefits of a natural ecosystem is the use of l it igat ion findings. The legal system is occasionally required to calculate the compensation to be paid to damaged parties for the loss of both physical and mental well-being. However,
inferring values specifically for the health benefits of a natural ecosystem from these compensation decision would be a di f f i cul t undertaking, particularly considering the extrapolation required to infer values across a widely diverging society from a small number of li t i gat i on findings.
and even fewer complementary goods which relate specifically to health benefits.
We are therefore limited to the use of hypothetical valuation techniques for valuing the health benefits of preserved natural
areas. As stressed in Chapter 2, a r e a l i s t i c questioning context
is essential for the successful operation of a hypothetical valuation technique and this may be d i f f i c u l t to achieve i f a distinct
measurement of health benefits is required, primarily because i t may be d i f f i c u l t to formulate a r e a l i s t i c set of questions which effec tive ly separates the health benefits from participatory users'
other benefits. More scope for measurement lies in an aggregated
benefit approach, aimed at participatory users, of the type detailed in Section 4.4.
4 . 6 EDUCATIONAL BENEFITS
Five sub-categories of educational benefits can be identified:
( i ) the satisfaction gained purely from any knowledge
acquired during a v i s i t to a natural area;
( i i ) the effect on the production and consumption of
marketed goods which may result from an educational v i s i t to a natural area - for instance, f i r s t hand experience of natural means of reducing soil erosion may result in better farming practices;
( i i i ) the satisfaction gained from any knowledge obtained
during the reading of books, magazines and articles and the viewing of films or television documentaries which are based on preserved natural areas;
145
(iv) the effect on the production and consumption of marketed goods resulting from individuals reading and viewing nature related material - this includes the gains to be enjoyed from the implementation of the results of scienti fi c research undertaken in natural areas for production benefits; and,
(v) the effect on non-marketed goods which results from either participatory or non-participatory use - for instance, much
scienti fi c research undertaken in national areas has direct implications for the management of such areas for the provision of the whole
range of benefits including those which are not marketed.
Each of these categories of educational benefit is amenable to different measurement techniques. The f i r s t category of benefit is clearly not directly marketed, for the same reasons as detailed for the other participatory benefits. Measurement must therefore rely on any relationships that exist with other markets and
hypothetical valuation techniques. Scope for measurement exists using other markets in terms of the substitute goods such as books, films and other simulations ,but the hypothetical valuation option is again subject to the problems of separating educational benefits from any other benefits which may occur in conjunction. However, separation may be possible by hypothetically varying the level of
educational benefit received by a vi si t or by proposing further displays, talks by rangers et c . , and employing an iterative bidding sequence
3
or a direct question on that basis. The second and fourth categories
3 Even this separation may not exclude aesthetic benefits which are enjoyed by respondents viewing displays of educational material.
both involve marketed goods and the procedures recommended in Section 4.3 for measuring the benefits of non-marketed inputs into the production process of a marketed good,can be used to evaluate these types of educational benefits. The third category involves measurement by the use of the relationship between non
parti ci patory educational benefits and the marketed goods which are their complements - books, films, magazines etc.^ Finally, the measurement of the f i ft h category of educational benefits is dependent on the type of non-marketed benefit which results. Again, the possibility of measuring participatory educational benefits within an aggregate of all participatory benefits must be recognized.
4.7 AESTHETIC BENEFITS
Aesthetic benefits are enjoyed by participatory users so long as those users' preferences favour natural scenery. Other individuals, who do not actually venture within the boundary of the natural area, may enjoy non-participatory aesthetic benefits by passing-by and looking at the aesthetically pleasing scenery.
Readers of "coffee-table" type books, which feature photographs of natural areas, also enjoy non-participatory aesthetic benefits.
Participatory aesthetic benefits will not be marketed for 5 the reasons outlined for the case of recreational benefits. 4 Again, complete separation will not be achieved. Aesthetic
benefits are important attributes of many popular nature-based publications and films.
5 As was noted in the Introduction, the problem of non-excludability is particularly evident in the case of passers-by who gain