| Title |
Ecological Settings and State Economies as Factor Inputs in the Provision of Outdoor Recreation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Management, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00267-013-0083-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christos Siderelis, Jordan W. Smith |
| Abstract |
State parks play a substantial role in the provision of outdoor recreation opportunities within the United States. Park operators must make crucial decisions in how they allocate capital expenditures, labor, and parkland to maintain recreation opportunities. Their decisions are influenced, in part, by the ecological characteristics of their state's park system as well as the vitality of their state's economy. In this research, we incorporate the characteristics of states' ecosystems and their local economies into a formal production analysis of the states' park systems from the years 1986 to 2011. Our analysis revealed all three factors of production were positive and inelastic. Expenditures on labor had the largest effect on both park utilization and operational expenditures. Our analysis also found a large degree of variability in the effects of ecological characteristics on both utilization and operating expenditures. Parkland utilization and operational expenditures were more elastic in areas such as Oceania and Mediterranean California relative to other ecological regions. These findings lead us to conclude that state park operators will experience variable levels of difficulty in both accommodating increasing demands for recreation from state parks and maintaining the existing quality of outdoor recreation provided within their system. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 20% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 2 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 7% |
| Engineering | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 August 2013.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#1,653
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,423
of 208,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#27
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 208,189 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.