The Economic Impacts & Benefits From Three Trails in Virginia J.M. Bowker John C. Bergstrom USDA Forest Service University of Georgia Joshua Gill US Peace.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Valuation 9: Travel cost model
Advertisements

Tracking the Money. The Government Performance and Results Act (1993) Value-added outcomes (not outputs) Performance Measurement GPRA requires that each.
1 Tourism Statistics Parry Sound District Tourism Research Unit Spring 2013.
Profile of the visitor and their vacation in JAMAICA The Jamaica Tourist Board through its Corporate Planning & Research Dept. maintains a statistical.
ANTHONY W. DIXON Economic Significance of College Baseball as a Tourism Attraction: A Pilot Study.
DR. ANTHONY W. DIXON DR. MARK HENRY Economic Significance of College Football as a Tourism Attraction.
The Virginia Creeper Trail: An Analysis of Use, Economic Impacts, Visitor Characteristics, and Preferences J.M. Bowker USDA Forest Service John C. Bergstrom.
BEA Economic Areas Aligning Workforce & Economic Information Association of Public Data Users APDU 2008 Annual Meeting The Brookings Institution Washington,
Presented by Elliot F. Eisenberg, Ph.D. National Association of Home Builders July 23, 2008 Bryan, TX THE METRO AREA IMPACT OF HOME BUILDING IN BRYAN &
1 Socioeconomic Trend Analysis Reno, NV February 2, 2007.
April 2015 Preliminary Report: Economic Impact of Public Natural Resource Lands JLARC Staff John Woolley Stephanie Hoffman Rebecca Connolly Legislative.
FORESTS’ ROLE IN TOURISM COST E33 meeting “Forests for Recreation and Nature Tourism” 1st November 2004 Pat Snowdon Economics and Statistics Forestry Commission.
Yellowstone-Grand Teton Loop Bicycle Pathway Estimated Economic Impact.
1 Travel Costs Scott Matthews Courses: and Lecture /25/2004.
Measuring Environmental Benefits: Revealed Preference Approaches Travel Cost, Hedonic Price, and Household Production Methods.
AGEC/FNR 406 LECTURE 14 Pesticide Runoff Potential from Field Crops.
Measuring Environmental Benefits: Revealed Preference Approaches Travel Cost and Hedonic Methods.
The Importance of Economic Census Data for Federal Policy Katharine G. Abraham Member, Council of Economic Advisers Hi-Beams for the Economic Road Ahead.
Basic Tourism Units and Concepts Visitor, Purpose of Trip and Usual Environment Paul V. Kern Section Chief Services Branch UNWTO/UNSD.
Econ 231: Natural Resources and Environmental Economics SCHOOL OF APPLIED ECONOMICS.
The 2006 Economic Impact of Visitor Expenditures on Northern New York State April, 2007.
Economic Evaluation Tools Benefit-Cost Analysis Cost Effectiveness Analysis Financial Analysis/Feasibility Fiscal Impact Analysis Economic Impact Analysis.
Economic Implications of an Aging Community Terry Rephann Regional Economist.
Economic Contributions of Florida Agriculture, Natural Resources, Food & Kindred Product Manufacturing, Distribution and Service Industries: 2008 Update.
Impact Analysis Assessing the change in local economic activity as a result of some change in the community Some potential issues What if we build a new.
Input-Output Model Basics Tom Harris University of Nevada, Reno University Center for Economic Development MS 204 Reno, NV and Gerald A. Doeksen.
Overview of the Bureau of Economic Analysis Regional Accounts at the BEA Robert L. Brown Calibrating the Nevada Economy: Data Tools for Assessing Our State.
How to use input-output multipliers ECON 4480 State and Local Economies 1.
What I was doing on Thursday during class.... Measuring Environmental Benefits: Revealed Preference Approaches Travel Cost and Hedonic Methods.
Notice: The views expressed here are those of the individual authors and may not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the United States Environmental.
July 2012 The Economic Impact of Tourism in Clark County, Ohio.
MPO/RPC Directors Meeting Asadur Rahman Lead Worker-Traffic Forecasting Section, BPED, July 28, 2015.
Recreation Economic Studies of Lake Mead & the Grand Canyon of the Colorado John Duffield Chris Neher David Patterson University of Montana Lake Mead Symposium.
Overview of the Bureau of Economic Analysis Regional Accounts at the BEA Robert L. Brown Monitoring Mississippi: Data & Tools for Understanding Our State.
The Profile of First-time & Repeat Trips to Maine Maine Overnight Visitor Studies - Special Analytics Prepared for the: Maine Office of Tourism November.
COOL Activity 1.2 Economic Impact Research The Economic Impact of the Essex Visitor Economy 2013 Essex and Epping district Produced on behalf of the COOL.
Raven’s Rock and the Tanawha Trail Sarah Dochow Andrew May Callie Safley.
6.02 Understand economic indicators to recognize economic trends and conditions Understand economics trends and communication.
LAKE-SUMTER MPO CYCLING SUMMIT MARCH 27TH 2015 CLERMONT CITY CENTER PREDICTIVE ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE WEKIVA TRAIL IN DOWNTOWN MT DORA.
Outline of presentation Travel cost method – concept, example, assumptions Consumer surplus related to TCM Visitor’s table Demand curve Concerns regarding.
Tourism Statistics and Tourism Satellite Accounts in Turkey
Making the Most of a Linear Park Hugh Morris Rails-to-Trails Conservancy
Travel and Tourism in Maine 2000 Visitor Study Prepared for the: Maine Office of Tourism July 18, 2001 Top-Line Results.
Australian National Accounts State Accounts States of Australia.
Economic Benefits Associated with Corps of Engineers Programs Dr. Wen-Huei Chang PROSPECT COURSE - ECONOMIC ANALYSIS, March.
Six Bells Event Jane and Neil WERU. Valleys Regional Park Six Bells One Day Event in June Six Bells Event - background The Survey – practical details.
TYBEE ISLAND TOURISM STUDY, OUTLINE 1.Introduction 2.Survey of Tybee Island Visitors 3.Visitor Expenditure Patterns 4.Estimated Annual Visitation.
The Economic Benefit of National Park Yann-Jou Lin*, Bau-Show Lin, Ting-Ju Lin, Wen-Chin Huang Professor, Dept. of Horticulture Science, National Taiwan.
State Parks and Recreation Areas Ron Olson, Chief Parks and Recreation Division.
Evaluating Recreational Benefits of Water Resources on Small Geographical Areas An Application to Rivers in Puerto Rico Prepared by: Juan Marcos González.
Tourism Satellite Account Calendar Year 2014 The Economic Impact of Tourism in Finney County, Kansas.
Summer Campaign % of travelers have seen or heard a Tampa Bay Summer advertisement Tampa Bay’s Summer Campaign marketing reached 1.3M households.
Project Overview Step 1: Estimating the Stabilized Visitor Count to Gold Butte Using data obtained from the Foundation, Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
Holloway, Humphreys and Davidson, The Business of Tourism, 8 th Edition, © Pearson Education Limited 2009 Slide 5.1 The economic impact of tourism Chapter.
3.01 Discuss the economic impact of tourism.
Scoping and Suggested Approach. The team of Bleakly Advisory Group, PBS&J and Dr. Bruce Seaman were hired by the 1071 Coalition to prepare an analysis.
Economic valuation OF NATURAL RESOURCES
National Findings. Most Comprehensive Study Ever All 50 States + D.C.
การสัมมนา “ การจัดทำและพัฒนาระบบบัญชีประชาชาติด้านการ ท่องเที่ยวของประเทศไทย ” โดย กรมการท่องเที่ยว วันพุธที่ 2 ธันวาคม 2558 ณ ห้องกมลมาศ ชั้น 6 โรงแรม.
A methodology for the estimation of the economic impact of Outdoor Recreation in Northern Ireland Chris Gratton Themis Kokolakakis Sheffield Hallam University.
1 Update on Economic Analysis for Cape Hatteras National Seashore P.O. Box · 3040 Cornwallis Road · Research Triangle Park, NC Phone:
Parves Khan Andrew Gostelow 7 October 2009 Tourist Information provision A national economic impact review Tourism Management Institute National Conference.
Pensionomics 2014: Measuring the Economic Impact of DB Pension Expenditures MD Retired School Personnel Association Legislative Workshop November 13, 2014.
The Effect of 25 Years of HAULOVER BEACH
Domestic Travel Data AITC 2017 Conference Green Bay, WI
Ontario Theme Park Tourism Statistics 2015
Ontario Skiing Tourism Statistics 2015
Ontario Golf Tourism Statistics 2015
Tourism Incomes and Expenditures Surveys in Belarus
University of South Florida Center for Economic Development Research
Presentation transcript:

The Economic Impacts & Benefits From Three Trails in Virginia J.M. Bowker John C. Bergstrom USDA Forest Service University of Georgia Joshua Gill US Peace Corps Presentation to the Virginia Parks and Trails Association Alexandria, Virginia September 28, 2004

Partners  Virginia Creeper Club  Creeper Cabins  Virginia Trails  Virginia Dept Conservation & Recreation  Virginia Dept Forestry  National Park Service, Rivers & Trails  University of Georgia, Dept Ag & Applied Econ  USDA Forest Service, Region 8 & SRS  Numerous Volunteers

Major Objectives  Estimate Local Economic Impacts  Estimate User Economic Net Benefits  Describe Trail Users  Examine User Attitudes / Preferences

Today’s Objectives  Trail Descriptions  Economic Impacts vs. Net Benefits  Estimating Economic Impacts  Estimating Economic Benefits  Trail Case Studies  Some Conclusions

Trails Virginia Creeper Washington & Old Dominion New River State Park– water trail

Virginia Creeper Trail

Virginia Creeper Trail  Rural rail trail - Southwestern VA  35 miles long - multiple ownerships/mgmt  Cinder & limestone surface  Destination trail with heavy local use (48%)  Primarily day use - biking & walking  130,000+ visits annually  Strong local support

Virginia Creeper Trail  

Washington & Old Dominion

Washington & Old Dominion  Linear urban corridor - Northern VA  45 miles - Northern VA Reg Park Authority  Parallel asphalt & gravel (32) surface  Primarily local use (95%) - rec & commuting  Biking, blading, jogging, walking  1.7+ million visitors annually  Strong local group support

Washington & Old Dominion

New River State Park

New River State Park – water trail  Multi-venue setting – South central VA  39 mile water trail – 57 mile gravel trail  Destination trail with strong local use (57%)  Fishing, floating, other (gravel trail)  1 million visits annually to NRSP  155,000 water trail visits annually  State owned and operated

Benefits Impacts  Economic efficiency  Utility maximization  Demand curve  Consumer surplus  Willingness to pay  Measures value  Economic distribution  Export base theory  Input-output model  Linkages in economy  Traces effects of spending  Measures output & jobs

Expenditures by Locals and Nonlocals Impact Region Counties Local Resident Expenditures Per Person Per Day Trip (example: $10 average) Nonlocal Resident Expenditures Per Person Per Day Trip (example: $17 average)

Regional Economic Impact Analysis  Estimate Use  Define Local Impact Region  Survey Nonlocals – category, expenditures, group  Estimate recreation expenditures per person per trip by nonlocals for major expenditure categories  Allocate Local Impact Region expenditures to economic sectors in the Local Impact Region  Use IMPLAN model or MGM2 to estimate output, jobs and income in the Local Impact Region supported by nonlocal resident expenditures

Nonlocal Spending & Impacts  Detailed Survey NLB  Group expenditures whole trip  Group expenditures impact region  Spending party size  Per-person or group trip expenditures  IMPLAN Model or MGM2  Economic Impacts per 1,000 person-trips or per 1,000 group-trips

Use Estimation & Sampling  VCT  Stratified random – season, use density, weekday  130,000+ annually  W&OD  Quota sample – 8 trail segments  Summer density counts – seasonally adjusted  1.7 million+ annually  NRSP water trail  Convenience sample – 155,000 annually

Overview of IMPLAN Impact Modeling for PLANning  Computer-based, input-output economic model  Designed for regional economic impact analysis  Developed by the Forest Service, now MIG  Provides comprehensive, science-based system for estimating economic impacts of natural resource related projects  Since 1979, it has been used in a multitude of private and public sector applications to estimate the economic impacts of natural resource related and non-natural resource related projects on regional economies

Overview of IMPLAN  IMPLAN has two major components:  Nationwide database describing county-level economic activity and a computer model for constructing regional input-output models and estimating economic impacts from changes in economic activity.  The model is based on input-output accounting and analysis procedures used by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis and recommended by the United Nations

Detailed Survey Content  Trip characteristics  Spending characteristics  Travel time and distance to site  Trail issues and benefits  Area features  Household demographics  Annual usage  Primary purpose

Whole trip25 miles VCTVCT person/trp Priv. Lodg Pub. Lodg Food In Food Out Prim. Trans Other Tran Bike Rent Shuttle Use Fees Other Total Primary Purpose Day User Exp Profile Ave Spending Party Size = 3.34

Primary Purpose Overnight Exp Profile Ave Spending Party Size = 4.5 Whole trip25 miles VCTVCT person/trp Priv. Lodg Pub. Lodg Food In Food Out Prim. Trans Other Tran Bike Rent Shuttle Use Fees 0.00 Other Total

Non-primary Purpose Day Use Exp Profile Ave Spending Party Size = 4.3 Time Share =.193 Whole trip25 miles VCTVCT person/trp Priv. Lodg Pub. Lodg Food In Food Out Prim. Trans Other Tran Bike Rent Shuttle Use Fees Other Total

Non-primary Purpose Overnight Exp Profile Ave Spending Party Size = 3.40 Time Share =.04 Whole trip25 miles VCTVCT person/trp Priv. Lodg Pub. Lodg Food In Food Out Prim. Trans Other Tran Bike Rent Shuttle Use Other Total

Nonlocal Expenditures per Person-trip by User Type for Creeper  PPDU- $ 31 total  $ 17 in local area  PPON- $ 120 total  $ 82 in local area  NPDU- $ VCT share  $ 11 in local area  NPON- $ VCT share  $ 4 in local area * These numbers have been trimmed for outliers

Creeper Impacts Economic Impact Indicators Economic Impacts Per 1,000 Person Trips Primary Primary Non Prim Non Prim Day Use Overnight Output$23,606$114,398$14,968$6,411 Employment Total Income$10,270$45,944$6,014$3,200 Economic Impacts Per 1,000 Person Trips of VCT Use in Grayson & Washington Counties, VA, 2003 dollars

Nonlocal Economic Impacts Combined Local Economic Impacts of Nonlocal VCT Use Grayson & Washington Counties, VA, 2003 dollars Economic Impact Indicators Total Economic Impact Output$1,587,000 Employment27.4 Total Income$670,000

Economic Impact of VCT  Nonlocal spending supports  $1.6 million local economic output  30 local jobs  $670 thousand local income  40% to accommodation & food service sector  20% to recreation & entertainment sector

Economic Impact W&OD  $1.4 mil spending by nonlocals (5%) supports:  $1.8 million local economic output  34 local jobs  $643 thousand in local income  $ 5.3 million local spending  $ 6.6 million nonlocal spending total

Economic Impact NRSP – water trail  $2 mil spending by nonlocals (43%) supports  $2.3 million local economic output  50 local jobs  $752 thousand in local income  $465 thousand local spending  $5 million nonlocal spending total

Impacts Conclusions  Three trails have similar impacts in absolute $$ at $1.4 to $2.0 million/yr & jobs but …  Creeper and New River larger relative effects  To increase economic impacts  Increase share of primary purpose overnighters  Induce visitors to stay another night

Net Economic Benefit Analysis  Estimate Use – Primary purpose  Implement Survey  Trips per time period  Factors – distance, time, activity, demographics, etc  Estimate Statistical TC Demand Relationship  Trips = f (price, subst, income, activity, etc)  Derive Consumer Surplus per person/trip  Scale Use and CS for Aggregate Estimate

VCT Net Economic Benefit  Trips = tnb (TC, Sub, Num, High, Bike, Sex, Age) N=800  TC1= $0.131 mileTC2= TC1 + ¼ Wage  CS1= $22.78 pptCS2= $38.90 ppt  130,000 visits  108,870 prim purp trips  Aggregate NEB1= $ 2.3 million  Aggregate NEB2= $ 3.9 million

W&OD Net Economic Benefit  Trips = tnb (TC, Sub, Num, Time, Income) N=997  TC1= $0.131 mileTC2= TC1 w/ tsp  CS1= $ 9.08pptCS2= $13.63 ppt  Trips = 1.7 mil * 93% prim purp.  Aggregate NEB1= $ 14.4 million  Aggregate NEB2= $ 21.6 million

NRSP-WT Net Economic Benefit  Trips = tnb (TC, Sub, Num, Income, Fish) N=157  TC1= $0.131 mileTC2= TC1 + ¼ Wage  CS1= $11.73pptCS2= $25.24 ppt  Trips = 155,331 * 87% prim purp  Aggregate NEB1= $1.6 million  Aggregate NEB2= $3.4 million

Net Economic Benefits Conclusions  VCT $31 person/trip$3.1 million/yr  NRSP$18 person/trip$2.5 million/yr  W&OD$11 person/trip$18 million/yr