The recreational value of forests in a transition economy

1. The recreational value of forests in a transition economy Anna Bartczak, Tomasz Żylicz bartczak@wne.uw.edu.pl, tzylicz@wne.uw.edu.pl

2. Popular perception (FAO/UNECE 2005)Annual forest visitation patterns[benefits in Euro per person]

3. This perception is blatantly inaccurate! Both: • the number of visits, • benefits derived from a single visit seem to be much higher in Poland

4. General information on forests and forestry in Poland • The forest area: 9.2 million hectares = 28.4% of the Polish territory (the average share of forest area in Europe is 31.1%) • The average age of the forest stand is 60 years • 67% of forest stands are coniferous forest types • Forest ownership: 82.5% State-owned forests. Almost all of these are managed by the State Forest Enterprise (SFE)

5. Description of conducted surveys

6. Location of selected sites

7. Description of the forest sites

8. WTP for entering the forest [PLN 2005, nominal exchange rate: 1Euro=3,9 PLN] * Numbers in brackets are estimated for the sample including protesters

9. Other results * The survey conducted by the State Forest Enterprise (SFE) in 2003.

10. Explanation of the results achieved (a hypothesis) • The relationship between the income level and the demand for forest recreation is not a monotonic one (even though richer people may reveal a higher WTP for a single visit to a forest, they go there less frequently) • Consequently, the per capita value of the forest in a less developed country may turn out to be higher than in a more developed one But: No international data to verify this hypothesis

11. Weaker hypotheses verified on Polish data only • An existence of an inverted U- (or V-) shaped relationship between the annual value of recreational function of forests and the income level • Respondents from cities visit the forest less frequently than those from the rural areas.

12. Models Annual demand per visitor defined as: D=iBiXi • Model 1: Demand = ln ((TC x (annual number of visits)) • Model 2: Demand = (Open-Ended WTP) x (annual number of visits)

13. Impact of the extreme income groups on the demandfor visits (TC) – model 1 R2=0.185

14. Impact of the extreme income groups on the demand for visits (CV-OE) – model 2 R2=0.148

15. Key results • The value of a single trip in Poland, whether solicited in a CV survey or computed from TC – is closer to 1 EUR (which is typical of Western Europe) than to 0.25 EUR (attributed to Eastern Europe). • The annual number of visits is much higher than estimated for Western Europe (6.5) and even more than the one assumed for Eastern Europe (2.5) by the authors of the international forestry report UNECE/FAO, 2005 • The rural population (which in Poland makes up 38% of the total) reveals a larger demand for forest visits than the urban one. • The lowest income group may reveal (depending on the model applied) a larger demand for the same amenity than the highest one.

16. Alternative explanations(directions for further research) • Overestimation of demand for forest recreation, • Geographical variations in the demand for forest recreation: • Social and historical circumstances => habits and customs, • Availability of forest recreation resulting from urbanisation patterns, • Quality of forest ecosystems, • The demand for forest recreation may depend on the availability of public forest areas.