application of the travel cost method to urban...
TRANSCRIPT
APPLICATION OF THE TRAVEL COST METHOD TO URBAN FORESTS
IN JOHOR BAHRU
NURUL SHAHIRAWATI BINTI MOHAMED ROSLI
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA
APPLICATION OF THE TRAVEL COST METHOD TO URBAN FORESTS
IN JOHOR BAHRU
NURUL SHAHIRAWATI BINTI MOHAMED ROSLI
A project report submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Science (Planning-Resource & Environmental Management)
Faculty of Built Environment
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
JULY 2010
viii
To my beloved father, mother and sister
ix
ACKOWLEDGEMET
Alhamdulillah thanks to the Almighty, my project report finally completed on a
given period of time. In preparing this report, I was in contact with many people,
researchers, and academicians. Foremost, I owe my deepest gratitude to my supervisor,
Dr. Mohammad Rafee bin Majid for his patience, motivation, enthusiasm, and immense
knowledge. His guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this
report. I could not have imagined having a better advisor and mentor for my master
study.
My sincere thanks also go to Associate Professor Dr. Tetsu Kubota for offering
me the “Short-Term Training of Global Environmental Leaders Education Program for
Designing a Low Carbon Society at Hiroshima University” from October 2009 until
February 2010 with the support of JENESYS Programme 2009/10. This opportunity
had helped me to improve my research study and also skills.
I am indebted to my many of my colleagues to support and encourage me while
preparing this report, and for all the fun we have had in the last two years. My sincere
appreciation also extends to others who have provided assistance at various occasions.
Last but not the least; I would like to thank my family, my loved ones and friends
for supporting me at the first place throughout my life.
x
ABSTRACT
Urban forest features so many values. Forest and tree resources have so many
benefits and values from a wide range of socio-cultural, economics and environmental
values. Travel Cost Method (TCM) was developed to estimate the economic value of
environmental goods such as urban forest areas. In this study, the economic value of
urban forest has been estimated by using TCM with the case studies of MPJBT Urban
Forest and MBJB Urban Forest. 100 sets of questionnaire have been distributed to each
site. The number of annual visits made by visitors was used as dependent variable,
while travel expenditure to the urban forest, total distance (two-way) from the residential
area to the urban forest, and age of the visitor were selected as the independent variables
in the demand model. A linear form was used to estimate the consumer surplus of the
urban forest visitors. The linear regression equation gives the demand function for the
visitor to the site, and the area below demand curve gives the consumer surplus. The
results showed that consumer surplus per trip are RM 41.75 for the visitor of MPJBT
Urban Forest and RM 30.34 for the visitor of MBJB Urban Forest. These findings
would provide some useful information that might be needed for those involved in
planning and management for the development of urban forest sites especially in Johor
Bahru for the benefits of local communities.
xi
ABSTRAK
Hutan Bandar menawarkan pelbagai ciri yang bernilai. Hutan dan sumber pokok
mempunyai pelbagai keistimewaan dan nilai daripada pelbagai nilai sosio-budaya,
ekonomi dan persekitaran. Kaedah Kos Perjalanan (TCM) telah dibangunkan untuk
menganggar nilai ekonomi sesuatu persekitaran seperti kawasan hutan bandar. Di dalam
kajian ini, penggunaan nilai hutan bandar telah dianggarkan menggunakan TCM dengan
kajian kes di Hutan Bandar MPJBT dan Hutan Bandar MBJB. 100 helai borang soal
selidik telah diedarkan pada setiap kawasan. Jumlah kunjungan tahunan yang telah
dibuat oleh pengunjung digunakan sebagai pembolehubah bersandar, manakala
perbelanjaan perjalanan ke hutan bandar, jumlah jarak (dua hala) daripada kawasan
perumahan ke hutan bandar, dan umur pengunjung telah dipilih sebagai pemboleh ubah
tidak bersandar pada model permintaan. Bentuk linear telah gunakan untuk menganggar
lebihan pengguna daripada pengunjung hutan bandar. Persamaan regresi linear
memberikan fungsi permintaan kepada pengunjung ke kawasan itu, dan kawasan yang
berada di bawah lengkok permintaan memberikan lebihan pengguna. Keputusan kajian
menunjukkan bahawa lebihan pengguna pada satu lawatan untuk pengunjung Hutan
Bandar MPJBT ialah RM 41.75 dan RM 30.34 untuk pengunjung Hutan Bandar MBJB.
Penemuan ini akan memberikan beberapa maklumat berguna yang mungkin diperlukan
bagi mereka yang terlibat di dalam perancangan dan pengurusan untuk pembangunan
kawasan hutan Bandar terutamanya di Johor Bahru untuk kepentingan masyarakat
setempat.
xii
TABLE OF COTETS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE
TITLE i
DECLARATIO ii
DEDICATIO iii
ACKOWLEDGEMET iv
ABSTRACT v
ABSTRAK vi
TABLE OF COTETS vii
LIST OF TABLES xi
LIST OF FIGURES xiii
LIST OF APPEDICES xv
1 ITRODUCTIO 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Issues 4
1.3 Research Questions 5
1.4 Objectives of the Study 6
1.5 Significance of the Study 6
1.6 Chapter Outline 7
viii
2 LITERATURE REVIEW 8
2.1 Introduction 8
2.2 Definition of Recreation and Leisure 10
2.3 Benefits and Costs of the Urban Forest 12
2.3.1 Physical and Biological Environment 13
2.3.2 Social and Aesthetic Dimension 17
2.4 Factors Affecting Visitation to Urban Forest 17
2.5 Methods of Valuing the Environment 19
2.5.1 Public and Private Goods 21
2.5.2 Consumer Surplus 22
2.5.3 Travel Cost Method 25
2.6 Conclusion 28
3 METHODOLOGY 30
3.1 Background of Study 30
3.2 Study Areas 31
3.2.1 MBJB Urban Forest 31
3.2.2 MPJBT Urban Forest 38
3.3 Survey Design and Implementation 43
3.4 Data Analysis 45
3.4.1 Model 46
3.5 Conclusion 47
4 RESULTS AD DISCUSSIOS 48
4.1 Introduction 48
4.2 Socio-Economic Characteristics 49
4.2.1 Level of Education 49
4.2.2 Current Work Status 51
4.3 Group Trip Pattern 52
4.3.1 Age of Respondent 52
4.3.2 Gender of Respondent 53
ix
4.3.3 Mode of Transportation 54
4.3.4 Total Distance (two-way) 56
4.3.5 Time of Visiting 57
4.3.6 Day of Visiting 58
4.3.7 Company of the Respondent 59
4.3.8 Time Spent in the Site 60
4.3.9 Annual Visits to Urban Forest 62
4.3.10 Alternative Site 64
4.3.11 Travel Expenditure 65
4.3.12 Total Monthly Household Income of
Respondent 66
4.3.13 Main Attraction of Urban Forest 67
4.3.14 Factors Affecting Choice of Site 70
4.3.15 Satisfactory Level of the Respondent 72
4.4 MPJBT Urban Forest 75
4.4.1 Socio-Economic Characteristics 75
4.4.2 Correlations between the Factors Affecting
Annual Visits to Urban Forest 76
4.4.3 Multiple Linear Regressions 78
4.4.4 Consumer Surplus 80
4.5 MBJB Urban Forest 81
4.5.1 Socio-Economic Characteristics 81
4.5.2 Correlations between the Factors Affecting
Annual Visits to Urban Forest 83
4.5.3 Multiple Linear Regressions 85
4.5.4 Consumer Surplus 87
4.6 Limitations of the Results 88
4.7 Conclusion 92
5 COCLUSIOS 93
5.1 Introduction 93
x
5.2 Summary of Findings 94
5.3 Limitations of the Study 95
5.4 Suggestions and Recommendations 97
5.5 Conclusion 98
REFERECES 99
Appendices A – F 101 – 108
xi
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE O. TITLE PAGE
2.1 Benefits and uses of urban forests and trees 13
3.1 Facilities in the camping site 35
4.1 Main attraction of urban forest 69
4.2 Factors affecting choice of site 72
4.3 Satisfactory level of respondent in MPJBT Urban
Forest 73
4.4 Satisfactory level of respondent in MBJB Urban
Forest 74
4.5 Socio-economic characteristics 76
4.6 Correlations between the factors affecting annual
visits to urban forest 77
4.7 Multiple linear regressions 78
xii
4.8 Socio-economic characteristics 82
4.9 Correlations between the factors affecting annual
visits to urban forest 83
4.10 Multiple linear regressions 85
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE O. TITLE PAGE
2.1 Classification of demand curve approaches 20
2.2 Willingness to pay 24
3.1 Location of MBJB Urban Forest in Johor Bahru 33
3.2 Lake in MBJB Urban Forest 34
3.3 Swimming pool for children 36
3.4 Playground for children 36
3.5 Reflexology path 37
3.6 Location of MPJBT Urban Forest in Johor Bahru 39
3.7 Location of MPJBT Urban Forest in Mutiara Rini 40
3.8 Exercise equipments 41
3.9 Jogging tracks 41
xiv
3.10 Playground for children 42
4.1 Level of education 50
4.2 Current work status 51
4.3 Age of respondent 53
4.4 Gender of respondent 54
4.5 Mode of transportation 55
4.6 Total distance (two-way) 56
4.7 Time of visiting 58
4.8 Day of visiting 59
4.9 Company of the respondent 60
4.10 Time spent in the site 61
4.11 Annual visits to urban forest 63
4.12 Alternative site 64
4.13 Travel expenditure 66
4.14 Total monthly household income of respondent 67
xv
LIST OF APPEDICES
APPEDIX TITLE PAGE
A Questionnaire in English version 101
B Questionnaire in Malay version 103
C Cross tabulation between the time spent in the site and 105
the total distance (two-way) from their residential area
to MPJBT Urban Forest
D Cross tabulation between the time spent in the site and 106
the total distance (two-way) from their residential area
to MBJB Urban Forest
E Cross tabulation between total distance for two-way and 107
the annual visits by visitors to the MPJBT Urban Forest
F Cross tabulation between total distance for two-way and 108
the annual visits by visitors to the MBJB Urban Forest
xvi
CHAPTER 1
ITRODUCTIO
1.1 Introduction
Nowadays, urbanisation process brings with it a lot of challenges and problems
that we have to deal with. From the demand of land increases, and the energy, resource,
water, to the waste disposal needs of urban populations need to be met. So, one of the
main challenges of our time is to provide good living conditions to urban populations.
Challenges related to urbanisation are very significant.
Policymakers are facing tremendous pressures to develop city management
strategies that strive for sustainable cities where all inhabitants can enjoy at least a fair
quality of life and a reasonable healthy environment. Urban green spaces with trees as a
major component play an important role in order to make the city liveable, sustainable
and healthy. The contribution of forests, trees and other green urban areas to the quality
of urban life and the environment can be significant.
The term urban forest attempts to provide a new more relevant description that
reflects the more natural, lower maintenance less tailored or cared for, self sustaining
vegetation and treed areas that are characteristic of the forest (Justice, 1986). According
to Miller (1997), an urban forest may be defined as the sum of all woody and associated
vegetation in and around dense human settlements, ranging from small communities in
rural settings to metropolitan regions.
In Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur being the first city that adopted the Urban Forest
Landscape concept because it is becoming increasingly more expensive to develop,
manages and maintains the traditional gardens and landscape. According to Justice,
(1986), the urban forest concept for Kuala Lumpur is one which can provide all the
elements of a quality outdoor environment; cool, colourful, fragrant, fresh, clean and
green, visually attractive and enhancing the urban environment that makes urban living a
pleasant and enjoyable way of life. There is already a natural regenerating ecology that
occurs in Kuala Lumpur that is well on its way to meeting this urban forest concept.
An urban forest is a forest or a collection of trees that grow within a city, town or
suburb. In a wider sense it may include any kind of woody plant vegetation growing in
and around human settlements. Urban forest and trees play a very important role in
keeping our towns and cities comfortable environment to live. As we know, they
provide high-quality and working environments, recreation opportunities with nearby
settlements and also cleaner air and water. As cities struggle to comply with air quality
standards, the ways that trees can help to clean the air should not be overlooked. With
effective planning and management, urban trees and forests will provide a wide range of
important benefits to urbanites (Dwyer et al., 1992).
In recent years, the urbanisation of many cities advance the need for green space
in the community to serve people in multiple objectives of environmental protection,
recreation, and to meet people’s ability to incorporate physical activity into their daily
routines (Iamtrakul et al., 2005). Urban forests are becoming significant and
increasingly valuable component of the urban environment nowadays. Unfortunately,
3
because of the rapid development and urbanisation today, urban forest resources now are
declining day by day in many cities especially in the developing countries. Thus, there
must be some efforts to protect and preserve trees for the benefits today and in the
future.
According to Tyrväinen and Miettinen (2000), the cost of supplying urban
forests can be calculated in a relatively straightforward way, but the benefits are more
difficult to estimate. Most urban forest benefits do no have a market price. Many
economists and environmentalists have debated the issue of placing monetary values on
environmental goods. The most popular classification for the methods of the pricing and
valuation of environmental goods and services include Demand Curve approaches and
Non-Demand Curve approaches (pricing through market priced goods) (Jabarin and
Damhoureyeh, 2006).
Several methods of valuing environmental goods and services have evolved in
recent years (Shammin, 1999). According to Ortaçeşme et al. (2002), some methods
were developed for estimating the economic value of non-market environmental goods
such as parks and recreation areas in the last 40 years. Travel Cost Method (TCM) and
Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) are the most widely used methodologies in the
determination of recreational use value of forests around the world (Pak and Türker,
2006). TCM is the common indirect method used to estimate the recreational value of
natural areas. The basic premise of the TCM is that the time and travel cost expenses
which users incur to visit a site represent the “price” or access to the particular site.
4
1.2 Issues
Today, forest resources are declining rapidly and the resulting of these are only
fraction of what they could be. No one can deny about the importance and benefits of
forest resources especially open green spaces in the major cities such as mitigate many
impacts of urban development. Thus, local communities now realized the benefits of
urban forest and significantly becoming valuable component of the environment
especially in many cities around Malaysia.
Urban forest can be classified as one of environmental assets. Many of the
environmental assets are also public goods. No one can put or assume a certain amount
of value onto those benefits that they can get from urban forest. The recreational use of
urban forest is one kind of benefit obtained from urban forest. Thus, the economic value
of these benefits can be estimated by using a preferable method which is TCM.
In the district of Johor Bahru, there are two urban forests which are located in
Johor Bahru and near Skudai. These sites do not require any entry fees or charges
except for a certain activities and have received visitors all year around to do their
recreational activities there. So, it is very difficult for us or local authorities to evaluate
the economic value of urban forests in Johor Bahru.
This study assesses the economic value of urban forests that visitors derived by
estimating a TCM demand function. TCM is based on revealed preferences and real
markets of urban forests are observed. By estimating the demand curve for the visitors
visiting the urban forests in Johor Bahru, it is also possible to estimate the consumer
surplus of the visitors.
According to Klenosky et al. (2007), the mix of natural features and manmade
elements in the urban environment and areas presents unique challenge for the planners,
developers and managers. Even though some elements of the urban landscape in the city
5
such as forested areas and parks may attract or encourage visitation, others such as
industrial activities, odours, and noises may hide the positive elements, thus repelling
visitation. This study also will identify what are the factors affecting the choice of site
by visitors to urban forests. Besides that, this study identifies the factors that affecting
annual visits to urban forests by the visitors because there are many factors affect the
number of visits to a site
1.3 Research Questions
Based on the current issues above, a study or research must be conducted to
answer those issues and also research questions as below:
(i) How much visitors are spending as their travel expenditure for visiting urban
forest to do their recreational activities?
(ii) What are the attractions or factors for the visitors make repeated visits to do their
recreational activities in urban forest?
(iii) What is the economic value for the recreational services and activities in the
urban forest?
6
1.4 Objectives of the Study
There are three main objectives in this study that will be conducted based on the
research questions above:
(i) To assess the economic value of urban forest.
(ii) To determine the travel expenditure of visitors for visiting urban forest.
(iii) To identify the factors affecting the numbers of annual visits of visitors to urban
forest.
1.5 Significance of the Study
As a conclusion, the results of this study will find out the monetary value of
urban forest based on the assumption of TCM which is reflected in how much visitors
are spending just to get there and do their recreational activities.
There are very few of public parks and urban forests used for recreation purposes
in Johor Bahru. The economic value and benefits provided from these areas need to be
known for their future protection, planning and management
7
1.6 Chapter Outline
There are five chapters will be included in this study to discuss stages by stages
in each of the research progress. In Chapter 1, the researcher focuses to the research
questions, the main objectives to be achieved, and the significance of this study. Those
elements are very important in determining the direction and progress of this study.
Chapter 2 describes the literature review about definition of recreation and
leisure, the benefits and costs of the urban forest, factors affecting visitation to urban
forest and the method of valuing the environment which is Travel Cost Method (TCM).
Chapter 3 explains more detail about the methodology of this study. This will be
included background of the study, case study areas which are MPJBT Urban Forest and
MBJB Urban Forest in Johor, survey design and its implementation, and finally how the
data will be analyzed in the study based on the chosen model.
Chapter 4 deals with the empirical findings. The researcher presents the results
that obtained from the multiple linear regression analysis, and the calculation of the
consumer surplus of visitor to the urban forest sites. Also, there are a lot of figures and
tables to help and explain more about the data analyses.
Chapter 5 concludes the conclusions of the study; summary of findings,
suggestions and recommendations to the local authorities and limitations of the study.
99
REFERECES
Dwyer, J. F., McPherson, E. G., Schroeder, H. W. and Rowntree, R. A. (1992).
Assessing the Benefits and Costs of the Urban Forest. Journal of Arboriculture. 18(5),
227 – 234.
Iamtrakul, P., Hokao, K. and Teknomo, K. (2005). Public Park Valuation Using
Travel Cost Method. Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies
Vol.5. 1249 – 1264.
Jabarin, A. S. and Damhoureyeh, S. A. (2006). Estimating the Recreational
Benefits of Dibeen National Park in Jordan Using Contingent Valuation and Travel Cost
Methods. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences. 9(12), 2198 – 2206.
Justice, C. L. (1986). The Concept of the Urban Forest as Applied to Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia. Journal of Arboriculture. 12(7), 178 – 181.
Kahn, J. R. (2005). The Economic Approach to Environmental atural
Resources. (3rd ed.) Washington and Lee University: Thomas South Western.
Klenosky, D. B., LeBlanc, C. L., Vogt, C. A. and Schroeder, H. W. (2007).
Factors That Attract and Repel Visitation to Urban Forest Recreation Sites: A
Framework for Research. Proceedings of the 2007 ortheastern Recreation Research
Symposium. GTR-NRS-P-23, 39 – 47.
Leibenath, M. and Badura, M. (2005). Manual for the Evaluation of atura 2000
Sites in Economic Terms. Dresden, Riga: Jelgavas Tipografija.
Maizatun, M. (2009). Urban Forest Protection from the perspective of
Environmental Law in Malaysia: Issues and Challenges. RICS Cobra Research
Conference, University of Cape Town. 10 -11 September. University of Cape Town,
Cape Town: RICS, 1125 – 1135.
Miller, R. W. (1988). Urban Forestry: Planning and Managing Urban
Greenspaces. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Miller, R. W. (1997). Urban Forestry: Planning and Managing Urban
Greenspaces. (2nd ed.) New York: Prentice Hall.
100
Mohd Shahwahid, H. O., Jamal, O., Redzuan, O., Awang Noor, A. G. And Nik
Hashim, N. M. (1999). The Economic Value of Sport Fishing Recreation at the Matang
Mangrove Wetlands: Application of the Travel Cost Method. UEP/ROAP. CP/5220-
97-03, 148 – 167.
Ortaçeşme, V., Özkan, B. and Karagüzel, O. (2002). An Estimation of the
Recreational Use Value of Kursunlu Waterfall Nature Park by the Individual Travel
Cost Method. Turk J Agri For. 26, 57 – 62.
Pak, M. and Türker, M. F. (2006). Estimation of Recreational Use Value of
Forest Resources by Using Individual Travel Cost and Contingent Valuation Methods
(Kayabaşi Forest Recreation Site Sample). Journal of Applied Sciences. 6(1), 1 – 5.
Romanes, G. J. (1879). The Science and Philosophy of Recreation. The Popular
Science Monthly, 772 – 795.
Shammin, M. R. (1999). Application of the Travel Cost Method (TCM): A Case
Study of Environmental Valuation of Dhaka Zoological Garden. In Hecht, J. E. (Ed.)
The Economic Value of the Environment: Cases from South Asia (pp. 1 – 18). U.S.:
IUCN.
Sharma, K. K. (2000). Tourism and Development. (1st ed.) New Delhi: Sarup &
Sons.
Sohrabi, S. B., Yachkaschi, A., Oladi, J. Fard, T. S. and Latifi, H. (2009). The
Recreational Valuation of a Natural Forest Park Using Travel Cost Method in Iran.
iForest – Biogeosciences and Forestry. 2, 85 – 92.
Storm, S. (2000). Urban and Community Forestry: Planning and Design. In
Kuser, J. E. (Ed.) Handbook of Urban and Community Forestry in the ortheast (pp. 99
– 116). New York, N.Y.: Springer.
Tyrväinen, L. and Miettinen, A. (2000). Property Price and Urban Forest
Amenities. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 39, 205 – 223.
Tyrväinen, L., Pauleit, S., Seeland, K. and de Vries, S. (2005). Benefits and Uses
of Urban Forests and Trees. In Konijnendijk, C. C., Nilsson, K., Randrup, T. and
Schipperrijn, J. (Eds.) Urban Forests and Trees: A Reference Book (pp. 81 – 114).
Berlin: Springer.
101
APPEDIX A
PART A: GROUP TRIP PATTERNThis part of question is referring to the 2-way trip from your residence to the urban forest
site
Please tick (/) only one answer to indicate your response:
Age: ___ years old Sex: ( )Male ( )Female
1. How did you travel on this trip?
( ) Walking ( ) Own vehicle ( ) Bicycle ( ) Public transport( ) Others: ________________________
2. Your residency area: ____________________________
3. Estimation of total distance (2-way) to this trip: ___ km
4. When you are usually visiting this site?
( ) Morning ( ) Afternoon ( ) Evening On the( ) Weekdays ( ) Weekends: Saturday & Sunday
5. With whom do you always go to this site?
( ) Family ( ) Friends ( ) Colleagues ( ) Alone( ) Others: ________________________
6. Time spent in this site?
( ) < 15 min ( ) 15-30 min ( ) 30 min-1 hr ( ) 1 ½-2 hrs( ) > 2 hrs
7. How many times you visit this site within a year: _____
8. Why did you choose to go this site?__________________________________________________________________________________________________
9. Where would you go if did not make this trip?
( ) Another urban forest site: ________________________( ) Another recreational site: ________________________( ) Another place: ________________________( ) Stay at home( ) Others: ________________________
10. How much do you spent on each of the following expenditures in this trip? State thebest amount:
Meals: food court, restaurant RM ___Shopping: foods RM ___