Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tourman

The influence of personal values in the economic-use valuation of peri-urban

green spaces: An application of the means-end chain theory
Natalia López-Mosquera, Mercedes Sánchez*
Universidad Pública de Navarra, Dpto. Gestión de Empresas. Edificio Madroños, 31006 Pamplona, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The implication of land-use managers and the local community in matters relating to peri-urban green
Received 12 February 2010 spaces has been modified by the growing importance of the values attached to such areas. This paper
Accepted 3 August 2010 uses means-end chain techniques to examine whether green space users reflect their own personal
values through the benefits and attributes they perceive in this type of good. The results show key factors
Keywords: to be opportunities for sport and recreational activities, improvement of physical and mental well-being
Peri-urban green space
and enjoyment of landscape beauty. Other values, both individual (personal enjoyment and quality of
Contingent valuation
life) and social (respect for others and a clearer conscience) also emerge. Further analysis to determine
Means-end chain theory
Personal values
whether values differ according to whether or not the visitor assigns a monetary value to the green space
Territorial management showed higher environmental and social awareness to be associated with higher willingness to pay for
Abstraction level peri-urban green space. Thus, the greater the perceived environmental values and the higher their
subsequent monetary valuation, the more effective environmental protection and conservation policies
are likely to be. These results may be worth consideration by land-use managers engaged in environ-
mental cost benefit analysis
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction growing importance attached to the personal values expressed

Most of the existing research on green spaces takes the form of
visitor perception studies focusing on the use and valuation of this
type of environmental goods (Asayu-Adjaye & Tapsuwan, 2008;
Baral, Stern, & Bhattarai, 2008; Jim & Chen, 2006) or the physical
and mental welfare benefits they provide (Kaplan, 1995; Korpela,
Ylén, Tyrväinen, & Silvennoinen, 2008; Tyrväinen, Mäikinen, &
Schipperijn, 2007). There has also been a recent upsurge of
studies attempting to explain the variation in how people use and
perceive the attractiveness of green spaces (Krenichyn, 2006). The
literature defines landscape perception as a complex process
involving both the more technical aspects of vision and psycho-
logical factors relating to cognition, affect and evaluation. All these
aspects, which are highly interrelated in visitors’ minds, determine
their preferences for specific landscapes (Sevenant & Antrop, 2009).
Over the last decade, the consideration of cognitive and affective
issues in user decision-making processes has led to a substantial
change in the conception and valuation of green spaces (Chiesura,
2004; Manzo, 2003; Sanesi & Chiarello, 2006; Velarde, Fry, &
Tveit, 2007). This change has come about largely as a result of the
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ34 948 169396; fax: þ34 948169404.
E-mail address: mersan@unavarra.es (M. Sánchez).
through green space use (Brown, 2005; Brown & Raymond, 2007)
and to the phenomenon of place attachment or people’s emotional
and cognitive with their physical environment (Williams & Vaske,
2003). Several studies have already shown that the evaluation of
a natural space usually reveals a person’s environmental value
orientation (Coogan, Karash, Adler, & Sallis, 2007; Kaltenborn &
Bjerke, 2002; Stern, Dietz, Abel, Guagnano, & Kalof, 1999, among
others). In exploring this last concept, researchers have focused on
human attitudes and behaviour towards natural landscapes, based
on the theory that they derive from underlying personal values,
regarded by some as the simple principles that guide evaluations or
cognitive inferences (Rokeach, 1979; González & Amérigo, 2008).
Given their role in determining people’s attitudes and responses
towards specific aspects of the environment (Kaltenborn & Bjerke,
2002) personal values need to be integrated into the analysis of
decision-making processes (Perugini & Bagozzi, 2001).
The above context of analysis, which examines the individual
decision-making process in terms of the relationship between
motivations and values and behaviour, provides the framework for
this study, which has two features that distinguish it from previous
research. The first is that it applies means-end chain methodology
in a cognitive model, to determine whether the differentiating
attributes of a given environmental good provide users with
benefits and reasons for its use and enjoyment that later lead to the

0261-5177/$ e see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2010.08.003
876 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889
fulfilment of personal end values. The environmental good in
question is a peri-urban green space,1 the Monte San Pedro park
(A Coruña, Spain), selected for its accessibility and possibilities for
recreational enjoyment. The second is that it aims to test for
variations in individual decision-making structures as revealed by
behavioural observation, with particular emphasis on contingent
valuation estimates of WTP.
The final understanding of the personal or intrinsic values that
drive the green space decision-making processes may assist
managers, primarily, to establish and justify their global aims and
ecosystem management strategies (Bengston, 1994; Brown &
Raymond, 2007; Kyle, Mowen, & Terrant, 2004). It might also
contribute to the anticipation, identification and fulfilment of the
needs and desires of visitors and to defining value orientations and
potential responses to landscapes. Thirdly, it could potentially
improve the prediction of public reactions to environmental prac-
tices in the face of future changes in ecosystem management and
provide new criteria for dealing with management-related conflict.
Finally, the analysis of landscape preferences, in terms of green space
users’ attitudes and environment-related economic behaviour, may
provide a useful tool for the design of environmental education
programmes (Múgica & De Lucio, 1996; Pooley & O’Connor, 2000).
Additionally, citizen participation in environmental education pro-
grammes helps to stimulate certain perceptive patterns and
promote a positive evaluation of the landscape. All of the above-
mentioned actions could potentially bring urban management
objectives into line with users’ needs.
The remainder of the paper is organised in five parts. Part 2
presents a review of the literature on personal values related to the
environment. Part 3 describes the methodological details and the
environmental good to be tested. Part 4 presents the main findings.
The discussion and the main conclusions and limitations of the study
together with suggestions of lines for future research make up Part 5.
2. Personal values related to the environment
The growing importance assigned to urban and peri-urban
green spaces has altered both how they are conceived and how they
are valued. Thus, attention has been drawn to the aesthetic, psycho-
physical and social health-related benefits provided by these spaces
(Chiesura, 2004), the importance of the social factor in their
valuation has been examined (Sanesi & Chiarello, 2006), and
emotional, health-benefit and landscape factors have been taken
into consideration (Velarde et al., 2007). This change of focus has
come about as the result of interest in identifying and quantifying
individuals’ landscape values and environmental values in general,
and in delimiting the nature of users’ personal attachment to them.
One important line of investigation has examined the link between
users’ emotional responses and perceptions of environmental
goods with a view to gaining a deeper understanding of the
valuation mechanism (Manzo, 2003; Williams, Davids, Burwitz, &
Williams, 1992). Subsequent studies have identified people as
active participants in the landscape, established a distinction
between functional and symbolic values, demonstrated the role of
culture, and linked place attachment to landscape values (Brown,
2005; Brown & Raymond, 2007). Thus, the research has extended
to the analysis of users’ reasons for using environmental goods and
the identification of the associated benefits. Another recent
contribution to the research is an interesting study of the benefits
1
Taking peri-urban green space to mean any area of outstanding landscape
interest, natural or artificial, located within a metropolitan boundary, where
overlapping natural, semi-natural, transition and artificial areas are adapted to
meet the recreational needs of the local community.
obtained from the use of green space as a means to fulfil personal
values (Krenichyn, 2006).
Broadly speaking, contact with the outdoors provides two types
of benefits; some directly related with the environmental good itself,
and others relating to its effect on users. The reported environmental
benefits include aesthetic appeal, cleaner air, observation of nature,
landscape beauty and wilderness, while the benefits for users are
predominantly of a psychological nature (Gobster & Westphal,
2004; Kalisch & Klaphake, 2007; Tyrväinen et al., 2007; Vesely,
2007). Another perspective describes contact with nature as
contributing to improve the sensory capacities, reduce fatigue and
stress, restore emotional balance, and sharpen cognitive skills
(Kaplan, 1995; Velarde et al., 2007; Korpela et al., 2008). The
resulting health benefits and outdoor physical activity are also
reported to have a positive effect on physical and mental well-being,
and a direct relationship has been established between exposure to
the natural environment and positive emotional responses
(Hansmann, Hug, & Seeland, 2007; Maas & Verheij, 2007). Finally,
focusing on the ways in which natural spaces stimulate social inte-
gration and personal interaction, one strand of research includes
a social component among the personal benefits (Barbosa et al.,
2007; Burgess, Harrisson, & Limb, 1998; Coley, Kuo, & Sullivan,
1997; Tyrväinen et al., 2007).
As well as identifying the beneficial effects derived from the use
of environmental goods, investigators have tried to determine to
what extent these effects are subject to personal and behavioural
factors. Thus, the visitor’s decision-making process varies, not only
with the good considered, but also with the user’s personal interests
and life experiences, and with the physical and social setting
(Neuvomen, Sievänen, Tönnes, & Koskela, 2007). Life experiences, in
particular, are a major focus of research interest. Two of the
perceptions most widely expressed by visitors to green spaces are of
freedom and silence (Klijn, Buij, Dijkstra, Luttik, & Veeneklaas,
2000). Other authors mention tranquillity, comfort, emotional
stimulation, security, anxiety, and boredom (Galindo & Corraliza,
2000). Fun, pleasure, tranquillity; the desire for new experiences;
emotional stimulation; health improvement and solitude have also
been documented (Davenport, Borrie, Freimund, & Manning, 2002).
The reported emotional benefits include experience of nature and
escape from the stressful pace of daily life, and the evidence
suggests that experience of nature is a source of positive feelings,
such as freedom, connectedness with nature and happiness
(Chiesura, 2004). Contact with nature as a means to attain
emotional and sensory experiences such as visual beauty and
physical and mental well-being has also been mentioned
(Krenichyn, 2006). Recent studies further emphasise the impor-
tance of these personal experiences, describing them as the root of
various perceptions, behavioural responses and practices among
green space users (Tyrväinen et al., 2007; Hanley et al., 2009). These
personal experiences depend on the personal beliefs and values that
determine people’s aesthetic appreciation and social values. Some
researchers perceive values as the objectives or goals that motivate
or drive people’s actions, with responses varying according to how
individuals draw on their personal experience (Ford, Williams,
Bishop, & Webb, 2009).
The case for the importance of personal values draws support
from the fact that certain studies have found them to have more
explanatory power than context for explaining people’s environ-
mental valuation and behaviour (González, 2002). Elsewhere, the
evidence suggests values as the main driver of environmental
behaviour (Grob, 1995). A recent strand of research highlights the
role of personal values of this type in human decision-making
related to the environment. Thus, the range of existing research
includes the distinction between internal values and external
values (Chryssohoidis & Krystallis, 2005), the influence of these
 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889
values on behaviour (Stern et al., 1999; Coogan et al., 2007) and the
impact of personal values on willingness for environmental
conservation (Winter, Prozesky, & Esler, 2007).
The recent incorporation of these behavioural differences into
various cognitive decision models has improved model perfor-
mance (Ford et al., 2009). In other words, the inclusion of personal
values enables more accurate prediction of public attitudes towards
the environment (Bodur & Sarogöllü, 2005; González, 2002;
Kotchen & Reiling, 2000; Kyle et al., 2004). From the economic
perspective, however, the main interest of this study lies in the use
of explanatory models incorporating monetary valuations of the
environmental good in order to explain the interrelation between
behavioural traits, willingness to pay (WTP) and personal values in
green space users. This kind of approach led to the development of
a model using values, perceptions and motivations for the use or
non-use of the environmental good as the explanatory variables for
the valuation process (Harris & Brown, 1992). Subsequent research
investigated the relationship between attitudinal and motivational
factors and contingent valuation estimates of environmental non-
use values (Kotchen & Reiling, 2000). The findings indicate an
association between higher WTP and more positive attitudes
toward the environment. Some research reports that WTP for
environmental protection is value-oriented (Stern & Dietz, 1994). In
the same vein, some authors have urged a renewal of interest in the
individual motives underlying WTP (Cooper, Poe, & Bateman, 2004).
This has generated research examining the role of motives in
explaining WTP values for a set of nested environmental goods with
potential use and non-use benefits, the findings revealing greater
complexity in the motivational structure when the analysis
considers both social and personal motivational factors. Analysis of
the preferences for multiple use forest management and average
social and individual WTP revealed the relevance of personal factors
(Mill, Van Rensburg, Hynes, & Dooley, 2007). Yet another strand of
work, relating attitudes towards pollution with WTP for wastewater
treatment and recycling, reports positive correlation between the
two (Tziakis et al., 2009). Investigation of citizens’ perceptions and
WTP for a market-based instrument and analysis of the influence of
social factors on individuals’ views have revealed social capital,
perceptions of the compliance of fellow citizens and the effective-
ness of the proposed policy as significant determinants of WTP
(Jones, Evangelinos, Halvadakis, Iosifides, & Sophoulis, 2010).
In the context of analysis presented above, this paper uses
means-end methodology to reveal the personal values underlying
the decision-making processes of visitors to the San Pedro peri-
urban park based on its attributes and related benefits. It also
assesses whether the cognitive structure varies according to
contingent valuation estimates of monetary values for the good
considered. The next section describes the research methodology.
3. Methodological issues
3.1. Means-end chain theory
Information concerning the relationship between the decision-
making process and cognitive structure in green space users is of
potential interest to environmental economists. Research on this
topic has largely focused on the most concrete level of visitors’ deci-
sion-making, that is, the attributes that the green space has to offer.
The intricacies of the cognitive structure, however, are such that
perceptions and valuations of the attributes of the good often result in
complex choice structures. Means-end chain (MEC) analysis involving
personal values has revealed the multi-level nature of decision-
makers’ cognitive choice structures (Pitts, Wong, & Whalen, 1991).
The means-end chain theory (Gutman, 1982; Howard, 1977;
Young & Feigin, 1975) assumes that the decision-maker’s subjective
877
perception of a good is the result of associations between its attri-
butes (the “means”) and more abstract cognitive schemata, which
include the personal values underlying certain behaviour (the
“ends”). Such associations determine the appeal of the characteris-
tics of the good in question (Reynolds & Gutman, 1988).
According to this theory, consumers’ product knowledge is
organised into hierarchical levels of abstraction, where the higher
the level of abstraction, the stronger and more direct the connection
to the self. Six ascending levels of abstraction describe the cognitive
structure linking product knowledge (concrete attributes, abstract
attributes and functional consequences) with self-knowledge
(psychological consequences, instrumental values and end values)
(Olson & Reynolds,1983). In the case in hand, the attributes are those
properties or characteristics of the environmental good, service or
performance that visitors may desire or pursue. The abstract attri-
butes are those whose verification is impossible to verify prior to use
except through internal or external information sources. Explora-
tion of the knowledge structure in the environmental context clearly
established the distinction between concrete and abstract attributes
(Purcell, 1992). Functional consequences are the benefits obtained
directly from the use of an environmental good. Psychosocial
consequences are of a more personal, social and less tangible nature.
Instrumental values are intangible goals related with the beha-
vioural means used to achieve the end aims and, finally, terminal
values refer to desired end states (Miele & Parisi, 2000).
Existing studies using this methodological approach in a similar
environmental context include an investigation of Dutch people’s
motivation to recycle under a compulsory recycling scheme
(Smeesters et al., 2003), which showed that they were driven by
environmental and “civic duty”-related values. Prior research
attempting to identify recycling goals and their effect on the deci-
sion to recycle had reached similar conclusions (Bagozzi &
Dabholkar, 1994). Exploration of social structure and social rela-
tions to determine the extent and quality of the environmental
impacts deriving from economic activities revealed the deter-
mining effect of human skills and human capital on time structure
dynamics (Cogoy, 1999). This paper aims to apply means-end chain
methodology to the study of peri-urban green spaces in order to
reveal the cognitive structure of the decision-making process
underlying the use and evaluation of the environmental good.
3.1.1. The laddering interview
With respect to the choice of data collection method for the MEC
application, the most widely known information-gathering tech-
nique is one known as “laddering”, which was first developed by
Hinkle (1965). Based on the personal construct theory (Kelly, 1955),
it is a face-to-face, one-on-one, in-depth, semi-structured inter-
viewing technique designed to develop an understanding of how
consumers translate product attributes into meaningful associa-
tions with respect to themselves (Bourne & Jenkins, 2005; Gutman,
1982). In other words, its purpose is to reveal people’s motives for
choosing a particular good (Russell et al., 2004). The laddering
interview is a three-stage process: the elicitation of key attributes,
the in-depth interview, and the analysis of results. In the first stage,
respondents are required to name the main attributes on which
they focus when comparing and evaluating goods. The revealed key
attributes are the starting point for the second stage, which is an in-
depth interview, where respondents are required to explain their
relevance in terms of the perceived associated consequences and
personal values. Interviewers repeatedly ask respondents “Why is
that important to you?” pushing them to increasing levels of
abstraction (from attributes to consequences and from there to
values) until they can go no further. This results in sequences of
concepts or “ladders”. The objective in the third stage is to plot the
concepts drawn out by the laddering technique on a so-called
878 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889

Table 1
Identification classification of the attributes, consequences and values used in this study.

Attributes Consequences Values

Concrete - Price (A1)
Attributes - A place to practice sport and
take physical exercise (A3)
- Distance from home (A4)
- Recreational facilities
provided (A7)
Abstract - Landscape beauty (A2)
Attributes - Closeness to nature (A5)
- Benefits to the health (A6)
- Less noise (A8)
Functional - I have good ecological habits (C1)
Consequences - I help the environment (C5)
- A way to escape from
routine/a way to switch off (C6)
- Frequency of use /regular
user of green space (C7)
Psychological - Stress relief /relaxation (C2)
Consequences - Physical well-being /improved
fitness (C3)
- Rest (C4)
- Better health /Mental
well-being (C8)
Instrumental - A source of fun, pleasure
Values and enjoyment (V2)
- Enhances my quality of life
and security (V4)
- Emotional stimulation (V6)
- I’m more successful (V9)
End - A sense of social belonging (V1)
Values - Better relationships with others (V3)
- A sense of self-fulfilment
and accomplishment (V5)
- Being respected by others (V7)
- Peace of mind dignity and self-respect (V8)

implication matrix (Chiu, 2005; Miele & Parisi, 2000; Ter Hofstede,
Audenaert, Steenkamp, & Wedel, 1998). This matrix enables the
construction of a hierarchical value map (HVM), which is a tree-
diagram mapping the respondent’s thought process through the
various levels of abstraction (Reynolds & Gutman, 1988).
A literature review and a pilot survey carried out on a group of
experts guided the choice of attributes, consequences and values
considered in the survey designed to reveal green space visitors’
cognitive structures. It comprised eight attributes representing the
(concrete and abstract) characteristics of a peri-urban green space
and eight (functional and psychological) consequences relating to
its use (Table 1). The concrete attributes were drawn from findings
in the literature indicating that users’ perception and overall
valuation of green spaces are influenced by the admission fee,
distance from home, and the exercise and recreational facilities on
offer (Lee & Han, 2002; Tyrväinen & Väänänen, 1998; among
others). Research showing the influential factors to be landscape
beauty, closeness with nature and green space benefits informed
the choice of abstract attributes (Gobster & Westphal, 2004;
Krenichyn, 2006). The main functional benefits reportedly
perceived by green space visitors were the escape from routine,
frequency of use and increased environmental awareness
(Bernarth & Roschewitz, 2008; Chiesura, 2004; Togridou, Hovardad,
& Pantis, 2006) and the most highly valued abstract benefits appear
to be the physical and mental health improvements (Gidlöf-
Gunnarsson & Öhrström, 2007; Kaplan, 1995). The values for the
analysis presented in this paper were adapted from the LOV (list of
values) proposed by Kalhe (1985), later modified by the Rokeach
Value Survey (RVS), which identifies nine key personal values
that influence people’s lives (Chryssohoidis & Krystallis, 2005; Lee,
Soutar, & Louviere, 2007). The scale has been widely used to study
the impact of personal values.
The two possible approaches when conducting laddering
interviews are soft laddering and hard laddering2 (Costa, Dekker, &
Jongen, 2004; Grunert & Grunert, 1995). Hard laddering was
selected for the purposes of this study because it is quicker and
cheaper than soft laddering, places less pressure on the respondent
(Grunert & Grunert, 1995) and is more suitable when working with
large samples (more than 50 subjects) (Russell et al., 2004). The
technique used in the case in hand is the Association Pattern
Technique (APT) (Gutman, 1982; Ter Hofstede et al., 1998), which
uses two independent matrices: an AC matrix (attributes/conse-
quences) and a CV matrix (consequences/values).
2
Hard laddering refers to all interview and data collection techniques in which
subjects are compelled to generate or verify associations between elements within
individual ladders, in sequences that reflect increasing levels of abstraction. In soft
laddering, a natural and unrestricted flow of speech is encouraged during inter-
views, with associations between ACV being reconstructed subsequently during the
analysis (Costa et al., 2004).
Another methodological issue requiring consideration is how
many links to include on the HVM in order to obtain the most
meaningful results, or “cut-off level”. This indicates the number of
linkages registered before a connection ceases on the map (Leppard,
Russel, & Cox, 2004). It is not easy to determine what frequency of
linkages between two levels of abstraction is meaningful or signi-
ficant enough to be included on the HVM. A high cut-off level (a high
frequency of linkages) will give a simpler map, involving fewer
connections, hence some loss of relevant information, but greater
ease of interpretation. A low cut-off level (a lower frequency of
linkages) will result in a complex map that will contain a large
amount of information but will be more difficult to interpret. Prior
research has shown various ways of determining the cut-off point
(Pieters, Baumgartner, & Allen, 1995), but the consensus is that
a good cut-off point is one that selects the solution combining the
maximum amount of information with the greatest ease of inter-
pretation (Audenaert & Steenkamp, 1997 in Leppard et al., 2004).
The cut-off determination method used in this study, known
as “top-down ranking” (Russell et al., 2004; Leppard et al., 2004) is
based on the premise that a whole group of respondents will not
necessarily make the same number of linkages between two levels
of abstraction. It may therefore be inappropriate always to use the
same cut-off point when the number of linkages between
the different levels of abstraction varies (Barrena & Sánchez, 2009).
Top-down ranking enables the HVM to include only the most
frequent linkages between different levels of abstraction. In other
words, it selects the linkages in order of importance (the most
important linkage being the one with the most cell entries). This
provides an ordered set of HVMs, where the first map is the simplest
and easiest to interpret while showing the most important linkages.
The advantage of this method is that it allows observation of the
linkages between levels and permits between-group comparison
(Russell et al., 2004; Leppard et al., 2004). The software package
used in the data analysis was MecAnalyst Plus 1.0.
3.2. Contingent valuation method
Using the methodology described above, this paper analyses
whether cognitive structure influences users’ monetary valuation
of an environmental good. Contingent valuation (CV) provides the
WTP estimates. The high flexibility of this method suits a broad
range of public goods and situations, hence its widespread use in
the valuation of environmental goods. It has the advantage of
providing a hypothetical and direct method of estimating the
monetary value of environmental resources based on the results of
public surveys (Mitchell & Carson, 1989). This method overcomes
the problem that environmental goods cannot be bought or sold in
the marketplace, by presenting consumers with hypothetical
markets, in which they are invited to declare their maximum (WTP)
for the environmental good in question or their willing-to-accept
 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889
compensation (WTA) for a hypothetical loss (Venkatachalam,
2004). Maximum WTP and minimum WTA estimates are possible
using the economic concepts of compensating variation and
equivalent variation (Venkatachalam, 2004). If the adopted policy
generates an increase in users’ well-being, the compensation
variation (WTP) is the amount of personal income that has to be
given up by the visitor to attain an increased level of utility
(Venkatachalam, 2004), as in the case considered in this paper.
Equivalent variation (WTA) represents the amount of compensa-
tion offered to the user for a utility-level improvement in the event
that the provision of the public good does not take place
(Venkatachalam, 2004).
Three different survey modes are available: the face-to-face
interview, the telephone and e-mail (Del Saz, García, & Palau, 1999),
the choice depends on the characteristics of the particular
CVM study, and the advantages and drawbacks of each method
(Mitchell & Carson, 1989). Another issue for consideration is the
choice of elicitation format. There are five different formats for
eliciting subjects’ WTP for a given public good. The most commonly
used are the dichotomous choice (DC), the open-ended and the
mixed formats (the last being a combination of the first two). The
other two are the payment card format and the bidding game.3
Note also that, despite the advantages provided by the CVM,4 it
has often been criticised for its potential biases (Carson, Flores, &
Meade, 2001; Sudgen, 2005), which can arise for a variety of
reasons. (1) The hypothetical nature of the simulated market can
trigger strategic behaviour (free riding) by respondents. (2)
The “embedding” effect, when WTP for goods and services does not
vary according to the context; (3) The “sequence” effect, where WTP
varies according to position of the good in the valuation sequence;
(4) The “information” effect, where WTP is influenced by the type of
information supplied across different valuation scenarios; (5) The
elicitation effect, where WTP is influenced by the elicitation format;
(6) The hypothetical bias, where the hypothetical market presented
differs considerably from the real market; and, finally, (7) Protest
zeros, which are motivated by protest behaviour triggered by some
component of the survey design, such as the payment vehicle, or
ethical objections to personal payment for a public good
(Venkatachalam, 2004). Utmost care is necessary to avoid estima-
tion problems resulting from biases in order to maintain the relia-
bility of the results and the usefulness of this method for the
monetary valuation of environmental resources (Arrow et al., 1993).
A large number of CVM studies in the context of green space
management and planning consider both the recreational use value
of various environmental goods (Bernarth & Roschewitz, 2008; Del
Saz & García, 2007; Jim & Chen, 2006; Sayadi, González-Roa, &
Calatrava-Requena, 2009) and the non-use value of the conserva-
tion of an area for future use (Baral et al., 2008; Chen & Jim, 2008;
Pedroso, Freitas, & Domingos, 2007; Zoppi, 2007).
3.2.1. Logit regression and WTP econometric model
This paper uses logit regression to model the relationship of the
binary dependent variable (WTP) to the independent variables
based on econometric models presented by Lee & Han (2002),
Asafu-Adjaye and Tapsuwan (2008), and Baral et al. (2008). Most of
the variables tested have shown significant predictability in other
3
For a more detailed description of interview modes and elicitation formats, see
Mitchell and Carson (1989), Del Saz et al. (1999) and Carson (2000).
4
The main advantages are: (1) It is the only method available when it is
impossible to establish a link between the quality of the environmental good and
the consumption of a private good; (2) Its flexibility makes it suitable for addressing
all kinds of public goods and situations; (3) Ex-ante valuation; (4) the Hicksian
consumer surplus measure can be obtained directly; (5) It allows for the estimation
of non-use values (Carson, 2000; Del Saz & Suárez, 1998).
879
contingent valuation studies of natural resources (Asafu-Adjaye
and Tapsuwan, 2008; Chen & Jim, 2008; Del Saz & García, 2007).
The equation takes the following form:
ProbabilityðWTPÞ ¼ a þ b1 bid amount þ b2 age þ b3 gender
þ b4 education þ b5 income þ b6 frequency
þ error ð1Þ
where a is the constant and bi are the coefficients of the explana-
tory variables.
The dichotomous choice format was used to elicit WTP by
asking respondents whether they would be willing to pay a given
bid amount A. Visitors were assumed to be utility maximizing
when expressing their WTP the specified bid amount in exchange
for the recreational use of the peri-urban green space. Following
Hanemann (1984), this paper adopts the assumption that the
probability of a respondent being willing to pay a given bid amount
follows a standard logistic variate, if:
vð1; Y  A; sÞ þ 31  vð0; Y; sÞ þ 30 (2)
and rejects it otherwise. Here, v is the indirect utility which is
assumed to equal the utility u; Y is income, A is the admission fee, s
is other socio-economic characteristics affecting individual prefe-
rence, and 30 and 31 are the identically, independently distributed
random variables with zero means.
The utility difference (Dv) between the “yes” and “no” answers
takes the form:
Dv ¼ vð1; Y  A; sÞ  vð0; Y; sÞ þ ð31 þ 30 Þ (3)
The DC format of CVM has a binary choice dependent variable,
which requires a qualitative choice model. This paper uses a logit
model. The probability (P1) that the individual will accept an offer
(A) takes the form of the following logit model (Hanemann, 1989):
1 1
Pi ¼ Fn ðDvÞ ¼ (4)
1 þ expð  DvÞ 1 þ expf ða  bA þ gY þ qSÞg
where Fh(/) is the cumulative distribution function of a standard
logistic variate and some of the socio-economic variables included
in this study. b, g, and q are coefficients to be estimated
where b  0; g > 0; and 0 < q or q > 0 are expected.
WTP values are the truncated means. The logit model in Eq. (4)
is estimated by the maximum likelihood (ML) estimation method,
after which, the expected WTP value of can be calculated by
numerical integration, ranging from zero to Maximum Bid (A) as
follows:
Z
Max:A Z
Max:A
 
EðWTPÞ ¼ F pðDvÞ dA ¼ a* þ bA dA; (5)
0 0
where E(WTP) is the expected value of WTP, and a* is the adjusted
intercept added by the socio-economic term to the original inter-
cept term of a. The area beneath the curve in Eq. (5) provides the
truncated mean WTP values. Finally, the chi-square test of inde-
pendence provides an assessment of the associations between
categorical variables.
3.3. Questionnaire design
The application of CV and MEC theory requires the use of
a structured survey questionnaire. This study uses a four-part
questionnaire.
Part 1 collects data on visitors’ real and potential use of the
green space and the level of satisfaction experienced during the
880 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889
visit. Part 2 elicits WTP for the recreational use of a peri-urban
green space. The scenario5 presented to respondents prior to the CV
questions was formulated to be as realistic as possible and remind
them of the main assets of the area (Buckley, van Rensburg, &
Hynes, 2009; Kotchen & Reiling, 2000; Pedroso et al., 2007). The
purpose of this choice of scenario was to improve the credibility of
the proposal and minimise the risk of misinterpretation that is
inherent in this valuation method. The standard DC format in
combination with open-ended questions was used to elicit WTP
(Bateman, Langford, & Rasbash, 1999; Riera, 1994; Zoppi, 2007); the
inclusion of a control question helped to identify the reasons for
possible unwillingness to pay (Jorgensen, Wilson, & Heberlein,
2001; León, 1996; Tyrväinen & Väänänen, 1998). The three bid
prices selected were 1.5V, 2.5V or 3.5V6, and, to ensure indepen-
dence, they were uniformly and randomly distributed across
visitors (Scarpa, Hutchinson, Chilton, & Buongiorno, 2000). The use
of three bid prices raised the need for three versions of the ques-
tionnaire, one for each bid price.
Part 3 of the questionnaire was designed to capture those socio-
economic and demographic characteristics of respondents (age,
gender, level of education and income) that have been shown in
previous studies to play a role in user valuation of similar spaces
(Álvarez & Larkin, 2008; Creel & Farell, 2008; Jim & Chen, 2006;
Maat & De Vries, 2006; Mmopelwa, Kgathi, & Molefhe, 2007;
Tyrväinen & Väänänen, 1998).
Part 4 was designed as a laddering interview to reveal the
means-end chains formed by respondents and thus determine the
benefits they expect to obtain and personal end values they hope to
fulfil by using the park. In other words, this procedure tests for links
between certain personal values of the individual, the benefits
derived from green space use, and the associated attributes. This
information, as stated earlier, may serve to guide environmental
management.
A pre-test carried out prior to the survey on a sample of 30
subjects helped to improve the validity and user-friendliness of the
questionnaire. The design and administration of the pilot study took
place in a series of meetings and interviews with experts and focus
groups, who suggested minor adjustments. All those who answered
the questionnaire remarked on its clarity, readability and ease of
understanding. As a result, no rewording of the items was required.
The chosen methodology was face-to-face interviews adminis-
tered to respondents during their visit to the park. On average,
respondents took 15e20 min to fill out the questionnaires. They
were also encouraged to make further suggestions to the inter-
viewer. Interviews with samples of visitors to the two parks took
place over the period January and February 2008. This resulted in 180
usable questionnaires from the 200 visitors recruited from the
various zones of the “Monte San Pedro Park” (A Coruña, Spain); but
only 110 valid replies to the laddering interview section, due to its
length and complexity. This is a larger sample than reported in other
studies applying MEC theory, where, due to the numerous linkages
generated by this type of methodology, the average is 60 (Leppard
et al., 2004). Using distributions published in local census data7 it
was possible to stratify the overall sample by age and gender. This
5
The proposed assessment scenario and the contingent valuation questions are
explained in Annex 1.
6
The three bid prices were set based Silverman and Klock (1989) and Del Saz and
Suárez (1998) and the recommendations of the focus groups and panels of experts
consulted in the pre-test.
7 8
Data from statistical sources in the area concerned (Instituto Gallego de Esta-
dística (IGE)) show the samples to be representative of local age, gender and
income strata, allowing us to conclude that San Pedro park is used by a represen-
tative cross-section of the local population.
helped to reduce potential sampling error and increase the likelihood
of generating a representative sample of the A Coruña population.
This methodology section concludes with a brief description of
the survey area.
3.4. The peri-urban green space selected for the study: Monte de
San Pedro Natural Park (Coruña e Spain)
The Monte de San Pedro Natural Park, opened on June 6, 1999, is
located in the north-west of the Iberian peninsular (Spain). It is
a large, topographically varied area measuring 7.84 ha, offering
vistas of the city of A Coruña (Galicia) and a wide strip of coastline
stretching from Cape San Adrián and the Sisargas Islands, which lie
to the west, to Cape Prior and Cape Prioriño to the east. The
seashore is of particular interest due to its characteristic rock
formations, and the flora and fauna8 dispersed throughout the park
add a touch of colour and vitality to the scenery.
Abandoned army bases have left underground shelters,
barracks, lookout posts and shore batteries. The panoramic view as
one descends from the park includes all the major landmarks of the
city below. In addition to what nature itself has provided, there are
plenty of tracks and pathways, landscaped areas, public amenities,
ponds and information panels, etc. Since admission is free to all
who wish to enjoy the views, and generally relax, this park makes
a major contribution to the leisure and recreational opportunities,
and hence the quality of life, of locals and visitors alike.
4. Results
4.1. Characterisation of the groups based on their
valuation of the green space
The primary goal of this study is to reveal the cognitive structure
of visitors to a peri-urban green space. An additional aim is to
determine whether the complexity of the cognitive structure of the
visitors and the linkages they establish differ according to their
monetary valuation of the green space considered. To achieve these
objectives, two hierarchical value maps were created, one for the
group in which the contingent valuation estimate of WTP for green
space benefits was higher than zero and another for the group
declaring unwillingness to pay.
The two WTP groups were first characterised by usage
frequency, user satisfaction levels, socio-demographic characte-
ristics and differences with respect to the overall sample. As
already noted, of the 180 respondents who completed the ques-
tionnaire, only 110 correctly completed the in-depth laddering
interview. To assess whether the visitor profile remained invariant
over the whole sample (n ¼ 180) and the subsample (n ¼ 110),
their respective socio-demographic profiles were estimated. Table
1A in Annex 2 and Table 2 give the profiles of the overall sample
and subsample, respectively. Comparison of the two tables reveals
a similar visitor profile in both groups, despite the difference in
sample size. Groups 1 and 2 contain similar proportions of
respondents (50% in each group). In both the overall sample
(n ¼ 180) and the subsample (n ¼ 110), group 2 respondents (those
declaring willingness to pay for the use and enjoyment of the park
facilities) show a lower rate of usage (42% versus 50%) and
a higher level of user satisfaction (7.17 versus 7.18) than the overall
sample. In socio-demographic terms, the proportion of positive
The flora are dominated by yellow gorse and pink heather interspersed with
other typical coastal plants, some of them unique to the area. A great variety of
small birds including warblers, goldfinches and linnets add life and colour to the
scenery.
 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889 881

Table 2
Characterisation of respondents based on willingness or unwillingness to pay for use of the green space (n ¼ 110).

Group 1 Group 2 c2a/Fb Sig.

Respondents who are unwilling to pay Respondents who are willing to pay for use
for use of the peri-urban green space, 49% of the peri-urban green space, 51%
Frequency of visits
Sporadic 64.8% 50.0% 2.46a 0.12
Weekly/monthly 35.2% 50.0%

General level of satisfaction 6.78 7.18 2.59b 0.11

Age
Under 20 0.0% 8.9% 6.15a 0.19
21e30 25.9% 32.1%
31e50 61.1% 48.2%
51e65 11.1% 8.9%
Over 65 1.9% 1.8%

Gender
Male 53.7% 53.6% 0.00a 0.99
Female 46.3% 46.4%

Income
Low 42.6% 23.2% 5.38a 0.07
Average 46.3% 55.4%
High 11.1% 21.4%

Level of education
Less than high 25.9% 14.3% 3.20a 0.20
School/vocational school 29.6% 42.9%
University Degree 44.4% 42.9%

*All the parameters have a non-significant value, p > 0.05.

a
Levels of statistical significance determined by Pearson’s chi-square tests.
b
Levels of statistical significance determined by the Anova F.

willingness to pay is higher in the 31e50 age category (53.4% for
the overall sample and 48.2% for the subsample), and in the
middle-high class income group (60.2% for the overall and 55.4%
for the subsample).
The only noteworthy socio-demographic difference between
the two groups in both samples is disposable income (for the
overall sample: c2 ¼ 10.90 (sig. 0.00); for the subsample: c2 ¼ 5.38
(sig. 0.07)), which is not surprising given that WTP for use of the
park is the classification criterion. Income usually tends to play
a role in WTP for environmental goods. Thus, low income is posi-
tively associated with unwillingness to pay.
Following the proposed objectives, the next step is to determine
the cognitive structure displayed by each group. The ultimate
interest is to test for variation in cognitive structure in relation to
WTP, taking into account both the range of issues considered in the
decision-making process and the level of abstraction. The main
distinguishing feature between this study and others relating
personal values to WTP (Cooper et al., 2004; Harris & Brown, 1992;
Kotchen & Reiling, 2000; Mill et al., 2007) lies in the fact that the
selected methodology enables detection of interrelations between
personal values, desired benefits and the differentiating attributes
of the good in question.
4.2. Contingent valuation results
retains its significance (overall sample: t ¼ 4.48 (p < 0.01);
subsample: t ¼ 2.82 (p < 0.01)), and higher WTP can still be
observed among the younger members of the subsample
(t ¼ 1.63 (p < 0.10)) and among the women in the overall sample
(t ¼ 2.03 (p < 0.05)).
In order to complete the contingent valuation results and
analyse real WTP9, all protest responses were removed from the
sample (Cho, Yen, Bowker, & Newman, 2008; Verbic & Slabe-Erker,
2008). This reduced the number of observations to 97 in the overall
sample and 66 in the subsample. The response options: “I already
pay enough in taxes” and “I’m not sure the money would be put to
good use” were interpreted as protest responses.
After screening for protest responses, a repeat logit analysis
resulted in considerably higher WTP values than those presented in
Table 3 (a mean WTP of 2.38 Euros for the overall sample and 2.74
Euros for the subsample). The statistical significance of the bid price
variable in both models is slightly higher (overall sample: t ¼ 4.65
(p < 0.01); subsample: t ¼ 3.01 (p < 0.01)), again suggesting the
presence of starting-point bias.
Table 4 reveals the influence of the socio-demographic variables
on real WTP in both samples. The bid price retains its significance
(overall sample: t ¼ 4.46 (p < 0.01); subsample: t ¼ 2.68
(p < 0.01)), and there was no significant variation in the effect of the
remaining socio-economic variables.

As already stated, WTP was estimated by the contingent valua-

4.3. Hierarchical value maps
tion method. Table 3 presents the results of the estimation of the
logit models for the overall sample (n ¼ 180) and the subsample of
The WTP profiles resulting from the CV application described
laddering interviews (n ¼ 110), to enable comparison of the results.
above enabled the construction of two 6-level hierarchical value
The table shows that mean WTP is 1.33 Euros for the overall
maps, one for each WTP group. The cut-off points for the different
sample and 1.014 Euros for the smaller subsample. The significance
levels of abstraction appear in Table 5. These maps show all the
of the bid price variable in both models (overall sample: t ¼ 4.62
(p < 0.01); subsample: t ¼ 2.75 (p < 0.01)) suggests the presence
of starting-point bias. 9
As indicated in the methodology section, the questionnaire included a control
The data shown in Table 3 also reveal the influence of socio- item in order to distinguish protest zeros from real zeros. The scale items designed
demographic variables on WTP in both samples. The bid price to identify reasons for unwillingness to pay are given in Appendix 1.
882 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889

Table 3 Table 5
Logit models estimated to calculate mean WTP and assess the influence of socio- Cut-off points for the 5 levels of abstraction and percentage of total cases.
economic variables.
Group 1 Group 2
Hanemann’s model E(WTP)
Respondents who are Respondents who are
n ¼ 180 n ¼ 110 unwilling to pay for use willing to pay for use
of the peri-urban of the peri-urban
Coefficient T-Ratio Coefficient T-Ratio
green space green space
Constant 1.672 2.779*** 0.918 1.25
Cut-off point % Cut-off point %
Bid price 1.260 4.62*** 0.905 2.75***
Level 1 ACa 32 29.0 34 30.9
Log-likelihood 83.10 56.96 CVb 26 23.6 25 22.7
Chi-squared 26.95 8.67 Level 2 AC 29 26.3 28 25.4
Sig. 0.000 0.003 CV 23 20.9 22 20.0
E(WTP) 1.33 Euros 1.014 Euros Level 3 AC 26 23.6 25 22.7
CV 21 19.0 21 19.0
Level 4 AC 25 22.7 23 20.9
Logit model estimated to assess the influence
of socio-economic variables CV 20 18.1 19 17.2
Level 5 AC 24 21.8 20 18.1
n ¼ 180 n ¼ 110 CV 19 17.2 18 16.3
Coefficient T-Ratio Coefficient T-Ratio Level 6 AC 22 20.0 19 17.2
CV 15 13.6 17 15.4
Constant 1.370 0.87 0.297 0.163
Bid price 1.250 4.48*** 0.965 2.82*** a
Attribute-consequence.
Age 0.289 1.14 0.515 1.63* b
Consequence-value.
Gender 0.817 2.03** 0.777 1.57
Education level 0.087 0.34 0.234 0.71
Income 0.263 0.806 0.029 0.08
Frequency 0.273 0.667 0.20 0.40
off points for the consequence-value linkages are 15 and 17,
respectively.
Log-likelihood 79.37 61.30
Figs. 1 and 2 show the HVM (hierarchical value maps) for the
Chi-squared 34.41 15.14
Sig. 0.00005 0.019 two groups, with cut-off levels of 6 in both cases. The percentage
value that appears next to each element in the chain (attributes,
*p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.
consequences and values) indicates the proportion of respondents
making that particular linkage. Both groups show a high frequency
attribute-consequence linkages and all the consequence-value of linkages between the different levels on the ladders, giving an
linkages at or above the frequency of the sixth level of importance. initial indication of the relevance of the items selected for the MEC
Following Leppard et al. (2004) the cut-off point is different for analysis. That is, respondents establish a considerable number of
every level of abstraction and group of subjects, enabling use of the linkages between the attributes of the park, the consequences or
maps for between-group comparison. Thus, the cut-off point for the benefits they obtain from it, and their own personal values. This
attribute-consequence linkages is 22 on the map of the “unwilling- supports the notion that personal values play a part in users’
to-pay” group and 19 on that of the “willing-to-pay” group. The cut- perception of the attributes or differentiating features of the envi-
ronmental good, with variations according to the desired conse-
Table 4
quences or benefits.
Logit models estimated to calculate mean WTP and assess the influence of socio- Analysis of the information provided by these linkages reveals,
economic variables without protest responses. first, the existence of interesting between-group similarities. Thus,
Hanemann’s model E(WTP)
in terms of attributes, both groups value concrete features such
as “a place to practice sport and take physical exercise”
n ¼ 97 (total sample) n ¼ 66 (subsample)
and “distance from home”. One of the concrete attributes consi-
Coefficient T-Ratio Coefficient T-Ratio dered only by the positive WTP group is “price”, indicating its
Constant 3.58 4.38*** 3.54 3.12*** influence on WTP for green space facilities. The MEC method also
Bid price 1.502 4.65*** 1.29 3.01*** shows which abstract attributes are important. The results indicate
Log-likelihood 57.47 24.27 that the two groups have similar views on issues relating to the use
Chi-squared 28.24 10.98 and enjoyment of the park, since both value “landscape beauty”,
Sig. 0.0000 0.009 “benefits to the health” and “less noise”.
E(WTP) 2.38 2.74 In this kind of discussion, it is usual to make a distinction
between functional and psychological consequences. As far as
Logit model estimated to assess the influence functional consequences are concerned, both groups appear to
of socio-economic variables
value the frequency of visits (“frequency of use”), the opportunity
n ¼ 97 n ¼ 66 to take a break from the daily routine (“a way to escape from
Coefficient T-Ratio Coefficient T-Ratio routine”) and environmental awareness (“I help the environment”).
Constant 2.60 1.22 3.80 1.36 The finding that the positive WTP group was the only one to focus
Bid price 1.57 4.46*** 1.31 2.68*** on the issue of “ecological habits” is a clear signal to managers of
Age 0.06 0.17 0.205 0.39
Gender 0.39 0.69 0.252 0.31
this type of environmental goods that ecological awareness is
Education level 0.34 0.90 0.568 1.16 associated with higher WTP for green space use.
Income 0.13 0.31 0.315 0.53 The two groups also share a similar profile with respect to
Frequency 0.65 1.20 0.817 1.03 psychological consequences, both showing an appreciation for the
Log-likelihood 57.47 29.76 psycho-physical benefits derived from green space use (“physical
Chi-squared 31.61 14.64 well-being” and “mental well-being”) and the resulting health
Sig. 0.0001 0.023 benefits (“stress relief” and “rest”). In short, visitors appreciate both
*p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01. the functional and psychological benefits of green space use,
 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889 883

A sense of self- Better Attributes

Values
Complete ladder

End
fulfilment and relationships Consecuences
Incomplete ladder
Values
accomplishment with others
Enhaces my

Instrumental
13.6% A source of
quality of life

Values
fun, pleasure
and enjoyment and security
17.2%
20.9% 17.2% 23.9%
Consequences
Psychological

19.0% 19.0%

Physical Mental well- Stress relief Rest

well- being 18.1% 17.2%
being
I help the A way to Frequency
Consequences

20.0% 21.8% 26.3% 20.0% 22.7%

Functional

environment escape of use

from
routine

29.0% 23.6%
Landscape Benefits to Less noise
beauty the health
Attributes
Abstract

Distance from
Attributes
Concrete

A place to take home

physical exercise

Fig. 1. Hierarchical value map for Group 1 “Respondents unwilling to pay for use of the peri-urban green space” (for a cut-off point of 6).

Peace of Better A sense of self-

Values
End

mind dignity relationships fulfilment and

and with others accomplishment
selfrespect
Instrumental

A source of 16.3% 19.0% Enhaces my

Values

fun, pleasure quality of life

15.4%
and enjoyment and security
17.2%
17.2% 17.2% 19.0%
17.2%
Consequences
Psychological

20.0% 22.7%

Mental well- Rest

Physical well-being Stress relief being
I have good 25.4% 18.1%
ecological A way to Frequency I help the
Consequences

escape of use environment

Functional

habits
from 20.9% 20.9%
routine

30.9% 17.2% 18.1% 22.7% 18.1%

Benefits to Less noise Landscape
the health beauty
Attributes
Abstract

A place to take Distance from Price

Attributes
Concrete

physical exercise home

Attributes
Complete ladder
Consecuences
Incomplete ladder
Values

Fig. 2. Hierarchical value map for Group 2 “Respondents willing to pay for use of the peri-urban green space” (for a cut-off point of 6).
884 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889
although the ecological component has greater weight among
those whose monetary valuation of the good is higher.
A final key aspect of the between-group comparison concerns
the personal end values included in the hierarchical structure,
which fall into two categories: instrumental and terminal. Both
groups mention the instrumental values “A source of fun, pleasure
and enjoyment” and “enhances my quality of life and security” and
the terminal values “better relationships with others” and “a sense
of self-fulfilment and accomplishment”. Another terminal value
“Peace of mind, dignity and self-respect” appears only in the
positive WTP group. The greater use of values, particularly terminal
values, by this group appears to suggest an association between
WTP and a higher level of abstraction. Overall, the results confirm
the relevance of personal values in the valuation of green spaces.
These initial results, nevertheless, call for deeper analysis and
further examination of the ladders generated by the MEC applica-
tion to enable clearer conclusions regarding the difference in
abstraction levels between the two groups.
4.4. Analysis of the HVM ladders
The initial results described above are eligible for further ana-
lysis aimed at advancing in the understanding of the means-end
chain formation process through which users link green space
attributes to consequences and thence to values. The ladders
observed in this study show four linkages common to all respon-
dents, irrespective of WTP levels. The most important chain is the
one linking the concrete attribute “a place to practice sport and take
physical exercise”, the psychological consequence “physical well-
being” (formed by 29.0% of the zero WTP group and 30.9% of the
positive WTP group) and the instrumental value “a source of fun,
pleasure and enjoyment” (19.0% versus 22.7%). This appears to
suggest, as might be expected, that one of the main values pursued
by green space users is the pleasure of exercise and keeping fit.
A second important chain links the concrete attribute “distance
from home” to the functional consequence “frequency of use”
(23.6% of the zero WTP group, 17.2% of the positive WTP group) and
the value “a source of fun, pleasure and enjoyment” (17.2% versus
17.2%). This is also unsurprising, given that, where green space use
is concerned, frequency depends on proximity, and enjoyment
increases with frequency. The third key feature concerns the lin-
kages between the abstract attribute “benefits to the health” and
the psychological consequences “stress relief” (26.3% for the zero
WTP group, 20.9% for the positive WTP group) and “mental well-
being” (21.8% versus 25.4%). The latter, in turn, appear linked to the
instrumental value “a source of fun, pleasure and enjoyment”
(19.0% versus 17.2%) and the terminal value “better relationships
with others” (13.6% versus 19.0%).
The last key linkage, common to both groups, is between the
abstract attribute “less noise” and the psychological consequences
“stress relief” (20.0% for the zero WTP group, 20.9% for the
positive WTP group) and “rest” (22.7% for both groups) and the
instrumental values “a source of fun, pleasure and enjoyment”
(19.0% versus 17.2%) and “enhances my quality of life and secu-
rity” (23.9% versus 19.0%), respectively. This is a further reflection
of the association between green space use and health benefits.
Thus, this methodology provides further confirmation of the
interesting linkages that environmental goods users establish
between aesthetic, health-related, psycho-physical and social
benefits.
Across the sample as a whole, therefore, the ladders that
appear on the HVMs indicate more basic, less complex, associa-
tions between instrumental values, such as fun, pleasure and
enjoyment, and the park’s concrete attributes, such as opportu-
nities for practising sport and keeping fit or the possibility of
frequent visits. The linkages between park attributes and health
benefits reveal more abstract or complex associations involving
terminal values, such as the enhancement of relationships with
others and quality of life.
Nevertheless, the HVMs also reveal a series of between-group
differences in some of the ladders. An important factor for the
positive WTP group is “price”, that is, the admission fee, an attri-
bute associated by this group with the functional consequence
“frequency of use” (a link formed by 18.1% of the respondents) and
the instrumental value “a source of fun, pleasure and enjoyment”
(17.2%). Similarly, this group linked the abstract attribute “less
noise” with the psychological consequence “mental well-being”
(18.1%) and the terminal value “better relationships with others”
(19.0%). Lastly, a linkage appears between the abstract attribute
“landscape beauty” and the psychological consequence “rest”
(18.1%) and the instrumental value “enhances my quality of life and
security” (19.0%). Particularly striking is an incomplete ladder that
is exclusive to this group, linking the functional consequence
“I have good ecological habits” and the terminal value “peace of
mind, dignity and self-respect” (17.2%).
These results may lend support to the assertion that
cognitive structures involving health-related factors (noise avoi-
dance, rest inducement, improvement of mental well-being) are
more complex, since they include a greater number of links
between abstract attributes and instrumental and terminal values
(quality of life at the individual level and better relationships and
peace of mind at a more social, collective level). A further finding is
that respondents link concrete attributes, such as use of the park for
recreation, sports practice, and appreciation of the landscape to
personal enjoyment. Lastly, it is worth noting that linkages relating
to ecological issues are more numerous among those declaring
positive WTP. The following section proceeds with the analysis in
order to determine whether the initial differences, in terms of the
complexity of the cognitive process as revealed by the HVMs for
the zero WTP and positive WTP groups, find further reflection in
different degrees of abstraction.
4.5. Comparison of abstraction levels
Having identified the desired attributes, consequences and
personal values of each WTP group, and established the chains of
linkages, the next step was to assess the degree of abstraction of
each group’s cognitive structure. This was done by calculating the
average number of ladders and average number of elements of each
level (attributes, consequences and values), formed by each group
in order to check for possible between-group variation.
The sum of ladders for the overall sample was 1,917. The sorting
of these by WTP group revealed statistically significant differences
in terms of the average number of incomplete ladders, as shown in
Table 6. Thus, respondents belonging to the positive WTP group
formed an average of 14.70 complete ladders and 2.84 incomplete
Table 6
Average numbers of complete and incomplete ladders.
F de Group 1 Group 2
Snedecor
Respondents who are Respondents who are
unwilling to pay for use of willing to pay for use of the
the peri-urban green space peri-urban green space
Complete 0.331 13.57 14.70
ladders
Incomplete 5.204** 4.11 2.84
ladders
**p < 0.05.
 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889
Table 7
Average numbers of attributes, consequences and values done by each group
F Snedecor
Concrete attributes 0.972
Abstract attributes 0.833
Functional consequences 2.651*
Psychological consequences 1.114
Instrumental values 0.505
Terminal values 8.573***
*p < 0.10 and ***p < 0.01.
ladders (F ¼ 5.204, sig < 0.05), versus 13.57 complete and 4.11
incomplete in the zero/negative WTP group (F ¼ 0.331, sig > 0.10).
These initial findings already point to greater complexity in the
positive WTP group, because its members form a greater number of
attribute-consequence-value chains. Nevertheless, fuller analysis
will be required in order to support these findings.
The above results reveal a certain degree of abstraction in green
space valuation, varying with WTP. Table 7 presents a summary of
the average numbers of attributes, consequences and values eli-
cited from each group. The statistically significant differences that
can be observed relate to the number of terminal values (F ¼ 8.573,
sig < 0.01), which is greater in the positive WTP group, indicating
slightly more complexity or abstraction in their valuation process,
which suggests higher personal involvement (Walker & Olson,
1991). The presentation of the findings concludes with the
following table showing the complexity indices.
4.6. Complexity indices
The final part of the analysis was to compare the complexity of
the attribute-consequence-value chains appearing on the HVMs of
the two WTP groups, using the so-called complexity index, first
developed by Bagozzi and Dabholkar (1994). Two complexity
indices were estimated. The first, labelled C1, measures complexity
in terms of the concepts used in the HVMs. It is the result of
dividing the number of complete chains on each HVM by the total
number of attributes, consequences and values represented. The
second, labelled C2, measures complexity in terms of the linkages
forming the ladders on the HVMs. It is the result of dividing the
length of each chain of concepts (that is, the sum of its linkages) by
the overall sum of linkages on the HVM.
As can be seen from Table 8, the positive WTP group scored
higher than the zero WTP group on C1 (96.74 versus 94.75), but not
on C2 (1.42 versus 1.50). These results reveal an association
between WTP and greater complexity of the hierarchical value
structure in terms of the number of attributes, consequences and
values it includes. In contrast, there is no apparent association
between WTP and greater complexity in terms of the number of
linkages established between the attributes, consequences and
values. Thus, as previous analyses have already shown, there is no
Table 8
Complexity indices.
Number of Number Number Total C1
cognitions of links of paths length of (b/a)
(a) (b) (c) paths (d)
Respondents who 16 1516 16 24 94.75 1.50
are unwilling to pay
Respondents who 19 1838 19 27 96.74 1.42
are willing to pay
885
Group 1 Group 2
Respondents who are unwilling to Respondents who are willing to pay for
pay for use of the peri-urban green space use of the peri-urban green space
3.64 4.00
7.36 6.74
4.35 5.03
6.75 7.36
4.62 4.91
3.32 4.77
clear evidence of more complex cognitive structures in respondents
declaring higher WTP. A fuller explanation of the complexity of the
green space user’s decision-making process will therefore require
more detailed analysis.
5. Discussion and conclusions
The conception and valuation of natural spaces in general, and
peri-urban green spaces in particular, have evolved in line with
increasing awareness of the multiple benefits they provide in
terms of the physical and mental health of users. This evolution
has given rise to a new approach to the valuation of natural
resources that takes into account, as well as user socio-demo-
graphics, monetary valuation and the psycho-physiological bene-
fits offered by such areas, the personal values and emotional
attachments that visitors associate with them. Emotional benefits
play such an important role in people’s daily lives, particularly in
decisions relating to the use and monetary valuation of green
spaces, that they can be said to play a key role in generating
subjective responses in visitors and influencing the way they use
and perceive green space facilities.
Inspired by the suggestion that emotional responses to green
space use may play a key role, this study set out to explore the
cognitive structures of a sample of green space visitors and estimate
their WTP for such resources. The underlying cognitive structure
was revealed by means of means-end chain (MEC) methodology.
From an overall sample of green space visitors, two subsamples
based on contingent valuation estimates of WTP emerged. The
resulting visitor profile showed that respondents declaring wil-
lingness to pay for the use and enjoyment of park facilities report
lower usage frequency rates and higher user satisfaction levels and
tend to fall into the 31e50 year old, middle class/middle income
group. These findings are consistent with previous research on green
space visitor typologies (Jim & Chen, 2006; Vesely, 2007; Yilmaz,
Zengin, & Yildiz, 2007, among others). The only noteworthy socio-
demographic difference between the two groups in both samples is
disposable income. This initial finding is consistent with prior
research, where higher WTP is always associated with higher
income groups (Feinerman, Fleischer, & Simhon, 2004; Mmopelwa
et al., 2007; Togridou et al., 2006; Gürlük, 2006). This supports the
conclusion that the variation subsequently found in the analysis of
the decision-making structure is due not to differences in visitor
profiles but to different perceptions of the attributes, consequences
and values under scrutiny.
C2
The contingent valuation estimates of WTP were low at 1.33
(d/c) Euros for the overall sample and 1.014 Euros for the smaller
subsample, revealing the possible presence of starting-point bias.
Furthermore, only 51% of the subsample and 49% of the overall
sample declared their willingness to pay for the facilities.
These percentages of positive WTP responses lie within
the range of sample percentages obtained in similar studies: 79%
886 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889
(Meyerhoff & Liebe, 2006); 35% (Adams et al., 2008; Del
Saz, Barreiro, & García-Menéndez, 2003); and 46.8% (Jones,
Sophoulis, & Malesios, 2008). These high refusal-to-pay rates
suggest considerable resistance to the elicitation format used and
the unfamiliarity of Spanish respondents with this kind of decision-
making process (Del Saz-Salazar & Rausell-Köster, 2008).
The high refusal-to-pay rates obtained in this study led to
a repeat analysis excluding protest zeros, which resulted in
a substantial improvement of the mean WTP values, that is, 2.38
Euros for the overall sample and 2.74 Euros for the smaller
subsample, although the possibility of the presence of starting-
point bias still remained. This shows the influence of protest beliefs
on WTP, in the sense that, the higher the number of protest
responses, the lower the WTP for the environmental good in
question (Meyerhoff & Liebe, 2006). The high rate of protest bids
obtained in this analysis might be explained by poor economic
status (low income or unemployment) and hence inability to pay,
and difficulty in expressing the somewhat abstract idea of valua-
tion in monetary terms (Jim & Chen 2006; Tyrväinen & Väänänen,
1998).
The MEC analysis, performed with the in-depth laddering
interview technique, confirmed that a large number of values are
associated with the enjoyment of environmental goods. Observa-
tion of the HVM (hierarchical value maps) reveals the importance of
certain concrete and abstract attributes (sporting activities, distance
from home, landscape beauty, health benefits). These results fall in
line with findings obtained with different methodology, indicating
that green space valuation depends on the admission fee, the
proximity, and the facilities provided (Baral et al., 2008; Togridou
et al., 2006; Tyrväinen & Väänänen, 1998). An association between
the positive valuation of the environmental good and the search for
beautiful scenery and quieter surroundings has also been reported
(Lee & Han, 2002; Prada, González, Polomé, Gómez, & Vázquez,
2001). Some findings also point to the influence of awareness of
the functional and psychological benefits provided by green space
use (Chiesura, 2004; Davenport et al., 2002; Gidlöf-Gunnarsson &
Öhrström, 2007). Previous studies using alternative methodology
had already reached conclusions regarding the influence of value
fulfilment, both individual (relating to fun or quality of life) and
social (relationships with others), on the valuation of green spaces
(Ford et al., 2009; González, 2002; Harris & Brown, 1992; Hanley
et al., 2009; Mill et al., 2007; Tyrväinen et al., 2007). Involvement
in ecological issues and social awareness also feature strongly
among the values revealed by the positive WTP group.
All of the above supports the conclusion that there is an
emotional component in what peri-urban green spaces offer their
users. In addition, respondents expressing willingness to pay show
greater personal involvement through the terminal values they
associate with the environment and claim to get more than mere
fun and enjoyment out of their visits. Psychological consequences
or benefits, such as rest or stress relief, feature more prominently
in association with positive WTP. The awareness of health benefits
resulting from the enjoyment of environmental goods leads to
more complex cognitive structures, that is, greater involvement of
the subject’s personal values, where social values play a stronger
role than individual values. This confirms the already-accepted
association between health benefits and the use of this type of
goods (Hansmann et al., 2007; Kaplan, 1995; Korpela et al., 2008;
Maas & Verheij, 2007; Schultz, 2001; Velarde et al., 2007) while
also revealing the previously reported link with collective or social
activities (Chiesura, 2004; Sanesi & Chiarello, 2006). Thus, the
emotional attachment of people to nature is manifest not only in
their use of green spaces in general or their preference for one in
particular, but also in their perception of green spaces as a means
to satisfy personal values.
Based on the above findings, one interesting conclusion might
be that the greater the perceived benefits from environmental
goods, the greater the user’s personal involvement with them. It
would therefore be useful to convey to the public the range of
physical and psychological benefits the environment has to offer,
in order to increase their involvement in environmental conser-
vation and protection and respect for nature. One of the obvious
potential impacts of the perceived mental and physical health
benefits, and therefore worth factoring into the valuation, is the
reduction of the social cost of health care. Furthermore, the
proximity of peri-urban green spaces makes them highly acce-
ssible to urban dwellers, increasing their health benefit potential
for this segment of the population. These conditioning factors are
worth consideration by land-use managers, who might use them
to promote the social value of natural resources and to strengthen
their arguments in decision-making settings involving environ-
mental cost/benefit issues. It might also be useful to promote
cooperation between representatives of the local population and
land-use managers in green space designs.
The application of alternative methodological and attitudinal
approaches or social psychology theories could enrich the analysis
of this type of cognitive response and enable the prediction of
environmental goods users’ decisions. Further understanding of the
cognitive structures of non-visitors would also be desirable, in
order to establish differences between users and non-users. Efforts
to match visitor profiles to desired green space attributes and
benefits and to reveal the personal values involved in each case
would also enable extrapolation of the findings to other types of
environmental goods.
Annex 1
Questions used in the contingent valuation:
“A periurban park such as .. can be enjoyed for different
recreational uses. In the questions that follow, therefore, we
wish to ask you to estimate a monetary value for the satisfaction
or feeling of well-being you obtain from such uses, that is, how
you value the good. Bear in mind that we are asking you to think
in terms of real payment and to assume that the amount spent
could not be used for any other purpose”
- Taking into account all the possible benefits provided by the
area as a whole, would you be willing to pay an entrance fee of
X V?
 Yes
 No
- Bearing in mind that you would be willing to pay X V, how
much more would you be willing to pay?..V
- Bearing in mind that you would not be willing to pay X V, what
is the maximum price you would be willing to pay?..V
- If you are NOT willing to pay, please indicate your reasons by
placing an X in the appropriate box
Reason for unwillingness to pay Score
I already pay enough in taxes
This environmental resource is not worth
an entrance fee
I’m not sure the money would be put to
good use
I think entrance should be free of charge
I couldn’t afford to pay an entrance fee
Don’t know/no answer
 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889 887

Annex 2

Table 1A
Characterisation of respondents based on willingness or unwillingness to pay for use of the green space (N ¼ 180).

Group 1 Group 2 c2a/Fb Sig.

Respondents who are unwilling to pay Respondents who are willing to pay
for use of the peri-urban green space, 51% for use of the peri-urban green space, 49%
Frequency of visits
Sporadic 55.4% 58.0% 0.12 0.73
Weekly/monthly 44.6% 42.0%

General level of satisfaction 6.99 7.17 0.83 0.36

Age
Under 20 0.0% 6.8% 7.65 0.11
21e30 27.2% 27.3%
31e50 56.5% 53.4%
51e65 13.0% 8.0%
Over 65 3.3% 4.5%

Gender
Male 53.3% 47.7%
Female 46.7% 52.3% 0.55 0.46

Income
Low 44.6% 21.6% 10.90 0.00
Average 44.6% 60.2%
High 10.9% 18.2%

Level of education 26.1% 17.0% 2.31 0.31

Less than high school/ 39.1% 46.6%
vocational school
University degree 34.8% 36.4%

*Only income shows a significant value, p < 0.05.

a
Levels of statistical significance determined by Pearson’s chi-square tests.
b
Levels of statistical significance determined by the Anova F.

Bodur, M., & Sarogöllü, E. (2005). Environmental sensitivity in a developing country.

References
Adams, C., Seroa da Motta, R., Arigoni, O. R., Reid, J., Ebersbach, A. C., &
De Almeida, S. P. A. (2008). The use of contingent valuation for evaluating
protected areas in the developing world: economic valuation of Morro do
Diablo State Park, Atlantic Rainforest, Sao Paulo State (Brazil). Ecological
Economics, 66, 359e370.
Álvarez, S., Larkin, S. L. (2008). Valuing recreational benefits of a national park in
Andean Columbia. In: Selected paper prepared for presentation at the Southern
Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meetings Dallas, TX, February 2e6.
Arrow, K., Solow, R., Portney, P. R., Leamer, E. E., Radner, R. & Schuman, H. (1993).
Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. January 11, 1993, 66 pp.
Asayu-Adjaye, J., & Tapsuwan, S. (2008). A contingent valuation study of scuba
diving benefits: case study in Mu Ko Similan Marine National Park, Thailand.
Tourism Management, 29, 1122e1130.
Audenaert, A., & Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M. (1997). A consumer-oriented approach to the
marketing of food products: application of means-end chain theory to the
consumption of beef. In B. Wierenga, A. Van Tilburg, K. Grunert,
J. B. E. M. Steenkamp, & M. Wedel (Eds.), Agricultural marketing and consumer
behaviour in a changing world. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Bagozzi, R., & Dabholkar, P. (1994). Consumer recycling goals and their effect on
decisions to recycle: a mean end chain analysis. Psychology and Marketing, 11,
1e28.
Baral, N., Stern, M. J., & Bhattarai, R. (2008). Contingent valuation of ecotourism in
Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal: implications for sustainable park finance
and local development. Ecological Economics, 66(2/3), 218e227.
Barbosa, O., Tratalos, J. A., Armsworth, P. R., Davies, R. G., Fuller, R. A., Jonson, P., et al.
(2007). Who benefits from access to green space? A case of study from Shef-
field, UK. Landscape and Urban Planning, 83(2/3), 187e195.
Barrena, R., & Sánchez, M. (2009). Using emotional benefits as a differentiation
strategy in saturated markets. Psychology and Marketing, 26(11), 1002e1030.
Bateman, I. J., Langford, I. H., & Rasbash, J. (1999). Willingness to pay question
format in contingent valuation studies. In J. E. Araña, & C. J. León (Eds.),
Actualización de las preferencias en procesos iterativos de valoración con-
tingente. Hacienda Pública Española/Revista de Economía Pública, 177, 83e115.
Bengston, D. N. (1994). Changing forest values and ecosystem management. Society
and Natural Resources, 7, 515e533.
Bernarth, K., & Roschewitz, A. (2008). Recreational benefits of urban forests:
explaining visitors’ willingness to pay in the context of the theory of planned
behavior. Journal of Environmental Management, 89, 155e166.
Consumer classification and applications. Environment and Behavior, 37, 487e510.
Bourne, H., & Jenkins, M. (2005). Eliciting manager’s personal values. An adapta-
tion of the laddering interview method. Organizational Research Methods, 8,
410e428.
Brown, G. (2005). Mapping spatial attributes in survey research for natural resource
management: methods and applications. Society and Natural Resources, 18,
17e39.
Brown, G., & Raymond, C. (2007). The relationship between place attachment and
landscape values: toward mapping place attachment. Applied Geography, 27,
89e111.
Buckley, C., van Rensburg, T. M., & Hynes, S. (2009). Recreational demand for farm
commonage in Ireland: a contingent valuation assessment. Land Use Policy, 26,
846e854.
Burgess, J., Harrisson, C. M., & Limb, M. (1998). People, parks and the urban green:
a study of popular meanings and values for open spaces in the city. Urban
Studies, 25, 455e473.
Carson, R. T. (2000). Contingent valuation: a user’s guide. Environmental Sciences
and Technology, 34, 1413e1418.
Carson, R. T., Flores, N. E., & Meade, N. F. (2001). Contingent valuation: controversies
and evidence. Environmental and Resource Economics, 19, 173e210.
Chen, W. Y., & Jim, C. Y. (2008). Cost-benefit analysis of the leisure value of urban
greening in the new Chinese city of Zhuhai. Cities, 25, 298e309.
Chiesura, A. (2004). The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 68, 129e138.
Chiu, C.-M. (2005). Applying means-end chain theory to eliciting system require-
ments and understanding users perceptual orientations. Information and
Management, 42, 455e468.
Cho, S., Yen, S., Bowker, J. M., & Newman, D. (2008). Modeling willingness to pay for
land conservation easements: treatment of zero and protest bids and application
and policy implications. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 40, 267e285.
Chryssohoidis, G. M., & Krystallis, A. (2005). Organic consumers` personal values
research: testing and validating the list of values (LOV) scale and implementing
a value-based segmentation task. Food Quality and Preference, 16, 585e599.
Cogoy, M. (1999). The consumer as a social and environmental actor. Ecological
Economics, 28, 385e398.
Coley, R., Kuo, F., & Sullivan, W. (1997). Where does community grow? The social
context created by nature in urban public housing. Environment and Behavior,
29, 468e494.
Coogan, M. A., Karash, K. H., Adler, T., & Sallis, J. (2007). The role of personal values,
urban form, and autoavailability in the analysis of walking for transportation.
The Science of Health Promotic, 21, 363e370.
888 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889
Cooper, P., Poe, G. L., & Bateman, I. J. (2004). The structure of motivation for
contingent values: a case study of lake water quality improvement. Ecological
Economics, 50, 69e82.
Costa, A. I. A., Dekker, M., & Jongen, W. M. F. (2004). An overview of means-end
theory: potential application in consumer-oriented food product design. Trends
in Food Science and Technology, 15, 403e415.
Creel, M., & Farell, M. (2008). Usage and valuation of natural parks in Catalonia,
2001e2002. Investigaciones Económicas, 32, 5e25.
Davenport, M., Borrie, W., Freimund, W., & Manning, R. (2002). Assessing the
relationship desired experiences and support for management actions at Yel-
lowstone National Park using multiple methods. Journal of Park and Recreation
Administration, 20(3), 51e64.
Del Saz, S., Barreiro, J., & García-Menéndez, L. (2003). Provisión pública versus
provisión privada de suelo industrial: una aproximación hedónica. Santa Cruz de
Tenerife: X Encuentro de Economía Pública.
Del Saz, S., García, L. M., & Palau, J. M. (1999). Los beneficios sociales de la remodelación
urbanística de la fachada litoral de Valencia: un estudio de valoración contingente.
Biblioteca Civitas Economía y Empresa, Colección Economía. 209 pp.
Del Saz, S., & García, L. (2007). Estimating the non-market benefits of an urban park:
does proximity matter? Land Use Policy, 24, 296e305.
Del Saz-Salazar, S., & Rausell-Köster, P. (2008). A double-hurdle model of urban
green areas valuation: dealing with zero responses. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 84, 241e251.
Del Saz, S., & Suárez, C. (1998). El valor del uso recreativo de espacios naturales
protegidos: aplicación del método de valoración contingente al Parque Natural
de l’Albufera. Revista Española de Economía Agraria, 182, 239e272.
Feinerman, E., Fleischer, A., & Simhon, A. (2004). Distributional welfare impacts of
public spending: the case of urban versus national parks. Journal of Agricultural
and Resource Economics, 29(2), 370e386.
Ford, R. M., Williams, K. J. H., Bishop, I. D., & Webb, T. (2009). A value basis for the
social acceptability of clearfelling in Tasmania, Australia. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 90, 196e206.
Galindo, M. P. G., & Corraliza, J. A. R. (2000). Environmental aesthetics and psycho-
logical wellbeing: relationships between preference judgements for urban
landscapes and other relevant affective responses. Psychology in Spain, 4, 13e27.
Gidlöf-Gunnarsson, A., & Öhrström, E. (2007). Noise and well-being in urban resi-
dential environments: the potential role of perceived availability to nearby
green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 83 (2/3) 115e126.
Gobster, P. H., & Westphal, L. M. (2004). The human dimensions of urban green-
ways: planning for recreation and related experiences. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 68, 147e165.
González, A., & Amérigo, M. (2008). Relationship among values, beliefs, norms and
ecological behaviour. Psicothema, 20(4), 623e629.
González, A. (2002). La preocupación por la calidad del medio ambiente. Un modelo
cognitivo sobre la conducta ecológica. Tesis doctoral Universidad Complutense de
Madrid.
Grob, A. (1995). A structural model of environmental attitudes and behaviour.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15, 209e220.
Grunert, K. G., & Grunert, S. C. (1995). Measuring subjective meaning structures by
the laddering method. Theoretical considerations and methodological prob-
lems. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12, 209e225.
Gürlük, S. (2006). The estimation of ecosystem services’ value in the region of Misi
Rural Development Project: results from a contingent valuation survey. Forest
Policy and Economics, 9, 209e218.
Gutman, J. (1982). A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization
processes. Journal of Marketing, 46, 60e72.
Hanemann, W. M. (1984). Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments
with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66,
332e341.
Hanemann, W. M. (1989). Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments
with discrete response data: reply. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
71(3), 332e341.
Hanley, N., Ready, R., Colombo, S., Watson, F., Stewart, M., & Bergmann, E. A. (2009).
The impacts of knowledge of the past experiences for future landscape change.
Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 1404e1412.
Hansmann, R., Hug, S.-M., & Seeland, K. (2007). Restoration and stress relief through
physical activities in forests and parks. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 6,
213e225.
Harris, C. C., & Brown, G. (1992). Gain, loss, and personal responsibility: the role of
motivation in resource valuation decision-making. Ecological Economics, 5, 73e92.
Hinkle, D. N. (1965). The change of personal constructs from the viewpoint of a theory
of construct implications. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State Univer-
sity, Columbus.
Howard, J. A. (1977). Consumer behaviour: Application of theory. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Jim, C. Y., & Chen, W. Y. (2006). Recreation-amenity use and contingent valuation of
urban greenspaces in Guangzhou, China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 75,
81e96.
Jones, N., Sophoulis, C., & Malesios, C. (2008). Economic valuation of coastal wáter
quality and protest responses: a case study in Mitilini, Greece. The Journal of
Socio-Economics, 37, 2478e2491.
Jones, N., Evangelinos, K., Halvadakis, C. P., Iosifides, T., & Sophoulis, C. M. (2010).
Social factors influencing perceptions and willingness top ay for a market-based
policy aiming on solid waste management. Resources, Conservation and Recy-
cling, 54, 533e540.
Jorgensen, B. S., Wilson, M. A., & Heberlein, T. A. (2001). Fairness in the contingent
valuation of environmental goods: attitude toward paying for environmental
improvements at two levels of scope. Ecological Economics, 36(1), 133e148.
Kalhe, L. R. (1985). The nine nations of North America and the value basis of
geographic segmentation. Journal of Marketing, 50, 37e47.
Kalisch, D., & Klaphake, A. (2007). Visitors’ satisfaction and perception of crowding
in a German National Park: a case study on the island of Halling Hooge. Snow
Landscape Resources, 81, 109e122.
Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: toward an integrative frame-
work. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15, 169e182.
Kaltenborn, B. P., & Bjerke, T. (2002). Associations between environmental value
orientations and landscape preferences. Landscape and Urban Planning, 59, 1e11.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.
Klijn, J. A., Buij, A. E., Dijkstra, H., Luttik, J., & Veeneklaas, F. R. (2000). The forgotten
values of nature and landscape. Use and appreciation measured in money and
emotional value. Wageningen: Alterra Green World Research.
Korpela, K. M., Ylén, M., Tyrväinen, L., & Silvennoinen, H. (2008). Determinants of
restorative experiences in everyday favorite places. Health and Place, 14, 636e652.
Kotchen, M. J., & Reiling, S. D. (2000). Environmental attitudes, motivations, and
contingent valuation of nonuse values: a case study involving endangered
species. Ecological Economics, 32, 93e107.
Krenichyn, K. (2006). The only place to go and be in the city: women talk about
exercise, being outdoors, and the meaning of a large urban park. Health and
Place, 12, 631e643.
Kyle, G. T., Mowen, A. J., & Terrant, M. (2004). Linking place preferences with place
meaning: an examination of the relationship between place motivation and
place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 439e454.
Lee, C.-K., & Han, S.-Y. (2002). Estimating the use and preservation values of
national parks` tourism resources using contingent valuation method. Tourism
Management, 23, 531e540.
Lee, J. A., Soutar, G., & Louviere, J. (2007). Measuring values using best-worst
scaling: the LOV example. Psychology and Marketing, 24(12), 1043e1058.
León, C. J. (1996). Double bounded survival values for preserving the landscape of
natural parks. Journal of Environmental Management, 46, 103e118.
Leppard, P., Russel, C. G., & Cox, D. N. (2004). Improving means-end-chain studies by
using a ranking method to construct hierarchical value map. Food Quality and
Preference, 15, 489e497.
Maas, J., & Verheij, R. A. (2007). Are health benefits of physical activity in natural
environments used in primary care by general practitioners in The
Netherlands? Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 6, 227e233.
Maat, K., & De Vries, P. (2006). The influence of the residential environment on
green-space travel: testing the compensation hypothesis. Environment and
Planning A, 38, 2111e2127.
Manzo, L. C. (2003). Beyond house and haven: toward a revisioning of emotional
relationships with places. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 47e61.
Meyerhoff, J., & Liebe, U. (2006). Protest beliefs in contingent valuation: explaining
their motivation. Ecological Economics, 57, 583e594.
Miele, M. & Parisi, V. (March 2000). Consumer concerns about animal welfare and
food choice. Italian report on laddering interviews.
Mill, G. A., Van Rensburg, T. M., Hynes, S., & Dooley, C. (2007). Preferences for
multiple use forest management in Ireland: citizen and consumer perspectives.
Ecological Economics, 60, 642e653.
Mitchell, R. C., & Carson, R. T. (1989). Using surveys to value public goods: The
contingent valuation method. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future/Johns
Hopkins University Press. 480 pp.
Mmopelwa, G., Kgathi, D. L., & Molefhe, L. (2007). Tourists` perceptions and their
willingness to pay for park fees: a case study of self-drive tourists and clients for
mobile tour operators in Moremi Game Reserve, Botswana. Tourism Manage-
ment, 28, 1044e1056.
Múgica, M., & De Lucio, J. (1996). The role of on-site experience on landscape
preferences. a case study at Doñana National Park (Spain). Journal of Environ-
mental Management, 47, 229e239.
Neuvomen, M., Sievänen, T., Tönnes, S., & Koskela, T. (2007). Access to green areas
and the frequency of visits e a case study in Helsinki. Urban Forestry and Urban
Greening, 6, 235e237.
Olson, J. C., & Reynolds, T. J. (1983). Understanding consumers’ cognitive structure:
implications for advertising strategy. In L. Percy, & A. Woodside (Eds.), Adver-
tising and consumer psychology. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Pedroso, C. M., Freitas, H., & Domingos, T. (2007). Testing for the survey mode effect
on contingent valuation data quality: a case study of web based versus in-
person interviews. Ecological Economics, 62, 388e398.
Perugini, M., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2001). The role of desired and anticipated emotions in
goal-directed behaviours: broadening and deepening the theory of planned
behavior. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(1), 79e98.
Pieters, R., Baumgartner, H., & Allen, D. (1995). A means-end chain approach to
consumer goal structures. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12,
227e244.
Pitts, R. E., Wong, J. K., & Whalen, D. J. (1991). Consumers’ evaluative structures in
two ethical situations: a means-end approach. Journal of Business Research, 22,
119e130.
Pooley, J. A., & O’Connor, M. (2000). Environmental education and attitudes: emotions
and beliefs are what is needed. Environment and Behaviour, 32(5), 711e724.
Prada, B. A., González, G. M., Polomé, P., Gómez, M. J. M., & Vázquez, R. M. X. (2001).
Valoración económica del patrimonio. Instituto de Estudios Económicos. Fun-
damentos Pedro Barrié de la Maza.
 N. López-Mosquera, M. Sánchez / Tourism Management 32 (2011) 875e889
Purcell, A. T. (1992). Abstract and specific physical attributes and the experience of
landscape. Journal of Environmental Management, 34, 159e177.
Reynolds, T. J., & Gutman, J. (1988). Laddering theory, method, analysis and inter-
pretation. Journal of Advertising Research, 28, 11e31.
Riera, P. (1994). Manual de valoración contingente. Madrid: Instituto de Estudios
Fiscales.
Rokeach, M. (1979). Understanding human values: Individual and societal. New York:
Free Press.
Russell, C. G., Flight, I., Leppard, P., Van Lawick, V. P., Syrette, J. A., & Cox, D. N.
(2004). A comparison of paper-and-pencil and computerized methods of hard
laddering. Food Quality and Preference, 15, 279e291.
Sanesi, G., & Chiarello, F. (2006). Residents and urban green spaces. The case of Bari.
Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 4, 125e134.
Sayadi, S., González-Roa, M. C., & Calatrava-Requena, J. (2009). Public preferences
for landscape features: the case of agricultural landscape in mountainous
Mediterranean areas. Land Use Policy, 26(2), 334e344.
Silverman, J., & Klock, M. (1989). The behavior of respondents in contingent valuation:
evidence on starting bids. Journal of Behavioral Economics, 18(1), 51e60.
Scarpa, R., Hutchinson, W. G., Chilton, S. M., & Buongiorno, J. (2000). Importance of
forests attributes in the willingness to pay for recreation: a contingent valuation
study of Irish forests. Forest Policy and Economics, 1, 315e329.
Schultz, P. W. (2001). The structure of environmental concern: concern for self,
other people, and the biosphere. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21,
327e339.
Sevenant, M., & Antrop, M. (2009). Cognitive attributes and aesthetic preferences in
assessment and differentiation of landscapes. Journal of Environmental
Management, 90, 2889e2899.
Smeesters, D., Warlop, L., Cornelissen, G., & Vanden Abeele, P. (2003). Consumer
motivation to recycle when recycling is mandatory: two explanatory studies.
Journal of Economy and Management, 48(3), 451e468.
Stern, P. C., & Dietz, T. (1994). The value basis of environmental concern. Journal of
Social Issues, 50(3), 65e84.
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm
theory of support for social movements, the case of environmental concern.
Human Ecology Review, 6(2), 81e97.
Sudgen, R. (2005). Anomalies and stated preferences techniques: a framework for
a discussion of coping strategies. Environmental and Resource Economics, 32,1e12.
Ter Hofstede, F., Audenaert, A., Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Wedel, M. (1998). An
investigation into the association pattern technique as a quantitative approach
889
to measuring means-end chain. International Journal of Research in Marketing,
15, 37e50.
Togridou, A., Hovardad, T., & Pantis, J. D. (2006). Determinants of visitors’ willing-
ness to pay for the National Marine Park of Zakynthos, Greece. Ecological
Economics, 60, 308e319.
Tyrväinen, L., & Väänänen, H. (1998). The economic value of urban forest amenities:
an application of the contingent valuation method. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 43, 105e118.
Tyrväinen, L., Mäikinen, K., & Schipperijn, J. (2007). Tools for mapping social values
of urban woodlands and other areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 79, 5e19.
Tziakis, I., Pachiadakis, I., Moraitakis, M., Xideas, K., Theologis, G., & Tsagarakis, K. P.
(2009). Valuing benefits from wastewater treatment and reuse using contingent
valuation methodology. Desalination, 237, 117e125.
Velarde, M. D., Fry, G., & Tveit, M. (2007). Health effects of viewing landscapes e
landscape types in environmental psychology. Urban Forestry and Urban
Greening, 6, 199e212.
Venkatachalam, L. (2004). The contingent valuation method: a review. Environ-
mental Impact Assessment Review, 24, 89e124.
Verbic, M., & Slabe-Erker, R. (2008). An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay
for sustainable development: a case study of the Vol cji Potok landscape area.
Ecological Economics, 68, 1316e1328.
Vesely, É.-T.. (2007). Green for green: the perceived value of a quantitative change
in the urban tree estate of New Zealand. Ecological Economics, 63, 605e615.
Walker, B. A., & Olson, J. C. (1991). Means-end chains: connecting products with self.
Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 111e119.
Williams, A., Davids, K., Burwitz, L., & Williams, J. (1992). Perception and action in
sport. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 22, 147e204.
Williams, D. R., & Vaske, J. J. (2003). The measurement of place attachment: validity
and generalisability of a psychometric approach. Forest Science, 49, 830e840.
Winter, S. J., Prozesky, H., & Esler, K. J. (2007). A case study of landholder attitudes
and behaviour toward the conservation of renosterveld, a critically endangered
vegetation type in Cape Floral Kingdom, South Africa. Environmental Manage-
ment, 40, 46e61.
Yilmaz, S., Zengin, M., & Yildiz, N. D. (2007). Determination of user profile at city
parks: a sample from Turkey. Building and Environment, 42, 2325e2332.
Young, S., & Feigin, B. (1975). Using the benefit chain for improved strategy
formulation. Journal of Marketing, 39, 72e74.
Zoppi, C. (2007). A multicriteria-contingent valuation analysis concerning a coastal
area of Sardinia, Italy. Land Use Policy, 24, 322e337.