Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T11:07:40.651Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Use of Hedonic Prices to Measure Sport Fishing Demand

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Ivar E. Strand Jr. ,
Edward G. Yang  and
Virgil J. Norton
Ivar E. Strand Jr.
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maryland
Edward G. Yang
Affiliation:
Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C.
Virgil J. Norton
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maryland
Get access

Extract

Information requirements of public policy makers have placed a heavy responsibility on economists involved in applied research in the area of sport fishing. Increased fishing pressure and, in some cases, decreasing stocks have generated considerable competition between sport and commercial fishermen over scarce fish. Regional Fisheries Management Councils have sought advice as to how they can “best” allocate the scarce stocks between these two competing interests. Federal and state agencies, too, have sought guidance on estimation of benefits from replenishment and other programs for increasing sport fish catch.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , April 1981 , pp. 1 - 9
Copyright
Copyright © Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bockstael, N.Ε. and McConnell, K.Ε. “The Estimation and Use of the Household Production Function for Wildlife Management, U. of Rhode Island, October, 1978.Google Scholar
Brown, G.M. Jr. “Hedonic Valuation of Non-Market Natural Resources.” Paper presented at the American Economic Association meeting, Chicago, Illinois, August, 1978.Google Scholar
Clawson, Marion. Methods of Measuring the Demand for and Value of Outdoor Recreation. Resources for Future, Inc., 1959.Google Scholar
Harrison, D. Jr. and Rubinfeld, D.L. “Hedonic Housing Prices and the Demand for Clean Air,” JEEM, March, 1978, 81–102.Google Scholar
Kelejian, H. “TWo-Stage Least Squares and Econometric Models Linear in Parameters but Non-Linear in the Endogenous Variables,” J. Am. Stat. Assn., Vol. No. 66 (1971): 373–374.Google Scholar
King, A.T. “The Demand for Housing: A Lancastrian Approach,” Southern Economic Journal. Vol No. 25 (1976): 1077–1087.Google Scholar
Lancaster, Kelvin. “A New Approach to Consumer Theory, Journal of Political Economy. 74 (1966): 132–157.Google Scholar
McConnell, K.E. and Norton, V.J. “An Evaluation of Limited Entry and Alternative Approaches to Fishery Management,” in Proceedings of a Workshop on Limited Entry. University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, 1979.Google Scholar
Muellbauer, J. “Household Production Theory, Quality and the Hedonic Technique,” Am. Econ. Rev., 64 (1974): 977–994.Google Scholar
Muth, R.F. “Household Production and Consumer Demand Functions.” Economietica, July, 1966, 699–708.Google Scholar
Pollak, R.A. and Wachter, M.L., “The Relevance of the Household Production Function and its Implications for the Allocation of Time.” JPE. Vol. 83 (2), 1975, 255–277.Google Scholar
Spaulding, Irving. “Variation of Emotional States and Environmental Involvement During Occupational Activity and Sport Fishing.” AES Bulletin 402, Kingston, R.I., 1970.Google Scholar
Strotz, R.H. “The Empirical Implications of a Utility Tree.” Econometrica, Vol. 25 (1957): 269–280.Google Scholar