A Choice Modelling Approach to the Case of Rimini
9.5 Conclusion
Table 9.8 Comparison between residents and tourists’ best scenarios
Attributes Status quo
Environment friendly scenario
Mass-tourist scenario
Resident scenario Promenade vehicles pedestrians pedestrians Pedestrians
Overcrowding high risk low risk high risk high risk
Environment (beach) preservation
low permanent high low temporary Medium
Beach by night close close open open
Choice probabilities Residents Tourists
8.09%
10.20%
20.03%
15.96%
27.39%
40.53%
44.49%
33.31%
Moreover, we analysed how tourism policy and public investments in the des- tination might affect residents’ welfare. In this respect, the forthcoming project of building a coastal train to reduce mobility risk seemed not to be a top priority in the residents’ preferences. The policy implication is straightforward, since the project of transforming the seaside avenue in a pedestrian area is much more simpler and much less expensive than building a new railway.
Our exercise allowed a rough simulation of what might happen were such poli- cies implemented. Consider the implicit prices of Table 9.6 and assume that the policy maker were able to charge all residents with an extra tax equal to their will- ingness to pay; for the pedestrianization of the promenade, residents are willing to pay up to C 20.47 per month; if taxpayers in Rimini are around 100,000, these num- bers would lead to an extra revenue of up to C 24 million that could be used both to finance the project and to compensate losers from its implementation. However, residents might easily decide to pass the extra tax burden on tourists, since they are also willing to pay for the pedestrianization of the promenade (see Brau et al., 2008).
To the best of our knowledge, ours was one of the first attempts to check for any synergy and trade-off between tourists and residents’ preferences in a mass tourism destination, by applying the choice experiment technique on the local population. In the case of a mature destination such as Rimini, which recently made a great effort to diversify mainly towards business and cultural tourism, further research calls for other choice experiments, this time aimed to uncover preferences of “out of season”
(business and cultural) tourists.
References
Akis S, Peristianis N, Warner J (1996) Residents’ attitudes to tourism development: the case of Cyprus. Tourism Management 17:481–494
Alberini A, Rosato P, Zanatta V (2005) Combining actual and contingent behaviour to estimate the value of sport fishing in the lagoon of Venice. Ecol Econ 61(2–3):530–41.
Apostolakis A, Shabbar J (2005) Stated preferences for two Cretan heritage attractions. Ann Tourism Res 32(4):985–1005
Bateman IJ, Carson RT, Day B, Hanemann M, Hanley N, Hett T, Jones-Lee M, Loomes G, Mourato S, Ozdemiroglu E, Pearce DW, Sugden R, Swanson J (2002) Economic valuation with stated preference techniques. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK
Ben-Akiva M, Lerman S (1985) Discrete choice analysis: theory and application to travel demand.
MIT Press, Cambridge MA
Bennett J, Blamey R (eds.) (2001) The choice modelling approach to environmental valuation.
Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Boxall PC, Adamowicz WL (2002) Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: A latent class approach. Environ Resour Econ 23:421–446
Brau R, Cao D (2006) Uncovering the macrostructure of tourists’ preferences. A choice experiment analysis of tourism demand to Sardinia, FEEM Working Paper 33/2006
Brau R (2007) Il choice modelling nell’analisi del turismo sostenibile. In: Punzo L, Usai S (eds.) L’estate al mare. McGraw-Hill, Milan
Brau R, Scorcu AE, Vici L (2008) Assessing visitor satisfaction with tourism rejuvenation policies:
the case of Rimini, Italy. J Environ Plann Manage (Forthcoming)
Breffle W, Morey E (2000) Investigating preference heterogeneity in a repeated discrete-choice recreation demand model of Atlantic salmon fishing. Mar Resour Econ 15:1–20
Bull A (1991) The economics of travel and tourism. Longman Cheshire, Melbourne
Bunch DS, Louviere JJ, Anderson DA (1996) A comparison of experimental design strategies for multinomial Logit models: The Case of Generic Attributes. Working Paper, Graduate School of Management, University of California, Davis
Candela G, Giannerini S, Scorcu AE (2007) Le caratteristiche strutturali di una destinazione matura. Il caso di Rimini. Economia dei Servizi 1:123–46
Carson RT (2000) Contingent valuation: a user’s guide. Environ Sci Technol 34:1413–1418 Carson RT, Groves T, List JA, Machina M (2002) Probabilistic Influence and Supplemental Ben-
efits: A field test of the two key assumptions underlying stated preferences. Working Paper, University of California
Castellani M, Candela G, Dieci R (2007) Il turismo responsabile: un’opportunità per le destinazioni turistiche e per i turisti. Polit Econ 23(1):83–102
Crotts JC, Holland SM (1993) Objective indicators of the impact of rural tourism development in the state of Florida. J Sustainable Tourism 1: 112–120
Crouch GI, Louviere JJ (2004) The determinants of convention site selection: a logistic choice model from experimental data. J Travel Res 43(2): 118–130
Cummings RG, Taylor LO (1998) Does realism matter in contingent valuation surveys? Land Econ 74: 203–15
Doxey GV (1975) A causation theory of visitor-resident irritants: methodology and research infer- ences. Proceedings of the Travel Research Association, 6th annual conference, San Diego, California, pp. 195–198
Dwyer L, Forsyth P (1993) Assessing the benefits and costs of inbound tourism. Ann Tourism Res 20: 751–768
Faulkner HW, Tideswell C (1997) A framework for monitoring community impacts of tourism.
J Sustainable Tourism 5(1):3–28
Figini P, Troia T (2006) Le caratteristiche dei turisti a Rimini: un confronto tra due recenti indagini.
Sistemaeconomico 11(3):5–20
Figini P, Castellani M, Vici L (2007) Estimating tourist external effects on residents: a choice modelling application to Rimini. FEEM working paper 76.07
Freeman AM (1993) The measurement of environmental and resource values. Resources for the Future, Washington DC 332–341
Hanley N, Wright R, Koop G (2002) Modelling recreation demand using choice experiments:
climbing in Scotland. Environ Resour Econ 22:449–466
Hanley N, Mourato S, Wright R (2001) Choice modelling: a superior alternative for environmental valuation. J Econ Surv 15:435–462
Haralambopoulos N, Pizam A (1996) Perceived impacts of tourism: the case of samos. Ann Tourism Res 23:503–526
Hausman J, McFadden D (1984) Specification tests for the multinomial logit model. Econometrica 52:1219–1240
Hausman J, Wise D (1978) A conditional probit model for qualitative choice: discrete decisions recognizing interdependence and heterogeneous preferences. Econometrica 46:403–426 Hensher D, Rose J, Greene W (2005) Applied choice analysis: a primer. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge
Huybers T (2005) Destination choice modelling: what’s in a name?. Tourism Econ 11(3):
329–350
Huybers T, Bennett J (2000) Impact of the environment on holiday destination choices of prospective UK tourists: implications for Tropical North Queensland. Tourism Econ 6:21–46 Kessels R, Goos P, Vanderbroek M (2006) A comparison of criteria to sesign efficient choice
experiments. J Mark Res 43:409–419
Lancaster K (1966) A new approach to consumer theory. J Polit Econ 74(2):132–157
Lancaster K (1971) Consumer demand – a new approach. Columbia University Press, New York Landry CE, List JA (2007) Using ex ante approaches to obtain credible signals of value in
contingent markets: evidence from the field. Am J Agric Econ 89(2):420–32
Lindberg, K., Andersson TD, Dellaert BGC (2001) Tourism development: assessing social gains and losses. Ann Tourism Res 28(4):1010–1030
Lindberg K, Dellaert BGC, Rassing CR (1999) Resident trade-offs: a choice modeling approach.
Ann Tourism Res 26(3):554–69
Lindberg K, Johnson R.L. (1997a) The economic values of tourism’s social impacts. Ann Tourism Res 24:90–116
Lindberg K, Johnson RL (1997b) Modelling resident attitudes toward tourism. Ann Tourism Res 24:402–424
Liu J, Sheldon P, Var T (1987) A cross-national approach to determining resident perceptions of the impact of tourism on the environment. Ann Tourism Res 14:17–37
Louviere JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD (2000) Stated choice methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Mazzanti M (2003) Discrete choice models and valuation experiments. J Econ Stud 30:584–604 McFadden D (1974) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour. In: Zarembka P
(ed) Frontiers in econometrics. Academic Press, New York
McFadden D (1984) Econometric analysis of qualitative response models. In: Griliches Z, Intrili- gator MD (eds.) Handbook of econometrics II. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp 1395–1457 Morey E, Rossmann KG, Chestnut LG, Ragland S (2002) Valuing reduced acid deposition injuries
to cultural resources: marble monuments in Washington DC. In: Navrud S, Ready RC (eds) Applying environmental valuation techniques to historic buildings, monuments and artifacts.
Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK
Morrison MD, Bennett JW, Blamey RK, Louviere JJ (1996) A comparison of stated prefer- ence techniques for estimating environmental values. Choice Modelling Research Report 1, University College, The University of New South Wales, Canberra
Orsingher C (ed) (2004) Comprendere il turismo nella Provincia di Rimini. Mimeo, Comune di Rimini
Papatheodorou A (2001) Why people travel to different places. Ann Tourism Res 28(1):164–179 Pearce DG (1989) Social impacts of tourism. In: Social cultural and environmental impacts of
tourism, NSW Tourism Commission, Sydney, pp 1–39
Pizam A, Milman A (1984) The social impacts of tourism. UNEP Ind Environ 7(1):11–14 Provencher B, Baerenklau KA, Bishop RC (2002) A finite mixture logit model of recreational
angling with serially correlated random utility. Am J Agric Econ 84:1066–1075 Ryan C (1991) Recreational tourism: a social science perspective. Routledge, London
Scorcu AE, Vici L (2008) Il turismo balneare a Rimini: scenario attuale e possibili evoluzioni nelle preferenze dei turisti. Sistemaeconomico, forthcoming
Thurstone LL (1927) A Law of comparative judgement. Psychol Rev 34: 273–286
Train KE (1998) Recreation demand models with taste differences over people. Land Econ 74(2):230–9
Train, K.,2003. Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Travis AS (1984) Social and cultural aspects of tourism. UNEP Ind Environ 7(1):22–24
Wall G, Mathieson A (2005) Tourism: change, impacts and opportunities. Pearson Prentice Hall, Essex, UK
Williams TA (1979) Impact of domestic tourism in host population: the evolution of a model.
Tourist Recreation Res 4(1):15–21
Zanatta V, Rosato P, Alberini A, Reppas D (2005) The impact of speed limits on recreational boating in the lagoon of Venice. FEEM Working Paper 135/05
Zwerina K, Huber J, Kuhfeld WF (1996) A general method for constructing efficient choice designs. Working Paper, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University