Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Optimizing protected area entry fees across stakeholders: the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve, Michoacan, Mexico

  • ANTONIO KIDO (a1) and ANDREW SEIDL (a2)

Abstract

Tourists, protected area managers, gateway communities, and national or international interested parties may have different objectives for protected areas management in developing countries. When values and incentives are at cross-purposes, difficulties in management may persist, but policy alternatives may be available. This research hopes to better understand the incentives facing different groups of stakeholders in the ecological-economic management of the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve in Michoacan, Mexico. The quasi-private management of this protected area by ‘ejidatarios’ provides an additional feature of interest. Travel cost, contingent behavior and export base analyses are used to establish alternative optimal entrance price strategies at the Reserve. Potential policy alternatives from the perspective of each stakeholder group are explored. Significant changes in management strategy, optimal entry fee and economic benefit appear to be possible by recognizing different scales and orientations of relevant stakeholders.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Alberini, A., Kanninen, B., and Carson, R. 1994, ‘A general model for double-bounded discrete choice contingent valuation data’, Paper presented at the AERE session of the ASSA Meetings, Boston MA.
Beal, D. 1996, ‘A theoretical market model for national parks of different ecological character managed by one agency’, Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics 64: 177182.
Cameron, C. and Travedi, P. 1986, ‘Econometric models based on count data: comparisons and applications of some estimators and tests’, Journal of Applied Econometrics 1: 2953.
Cameron, T.A. 1992, ‘Combining contingent valuation and travel cost data for the valuation of non-market goods’, Land Economics 68: 302317.
Hanneman, M. 1984, ‘Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete choice responses’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66: 332341.
Hanneman, M. 1989, ‘Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete choice data: reply’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71: 10571061.
Kirman, A. 1992, ‘Whom or what does the representative individual represent?’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 6: 117136.
Leiftmann, J. 1998, ‘Options for managing protected areas: lessons from international experience’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 41: 129143.
Loomis, J. 1997, ‘Panel estimators to combine revealed and stated preference dichotomous choice data’, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 22: 233245.
Stoker, T. 1993, ‘Completeness, distribution restrictions, and the form of aggregate functions’, Econometrica 52: 887907.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Optimizing protected area entry fees across stakeholders: the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve, Michoacan, Mexico

  • ANTONIO KIDO (a1) and ANDREW SEIDL (a2)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.