Valuing the Attribute Enhancements of Urban Park: A Case of the King Rama IX International Mangrove Botanical Garden, Thailand

Main Article Content

Aekkapat Laksanacom
Udomsak Seenprachawong


The King Rama IX International Mangrove Botanical Garden (The King Rama IX-IMBG), Thailand provides a bundle of benefits, including a source for exchanging knowledge on mangrove forests and recreation opportunities. This study was applied a choice experiment to investigate the potential users’ preferences and willingness to pay for different educational programs and recreational enhancement projects in The King Rama IX-IMBG, Thailand. The population used in this study were tourists between the ages of 20 and 60 who had experience in traveling to provinces in the Eastern region. The sample size was determined using the ratio of 40 samples per choice set. There are 10 choice sets for this study, thus estimating the optimal sample size of 400 individuals who were determined by purposive sampling. The empirical results from conditional logit model show the potential users are willing to pay 25 Baht, 27 Baht, 89 Baht, and 102 Baht for improved museum design, information signs, recreation activities, and facilities, respectively. The results suggest that the planning and management of this place subject to budget constraints should take into account the attributes of this botanical garden and the preferences of visiting citizens to improve their welfares.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Laksanacom, A., & Seenprachawong, U. (2023). Valuing the Attribute Enhancements of Urban Park: A Case of the King Rama IX International Mangrove Botanical Garden, Thailand. Journal of Applied Economics and Management Strategy, 10(1), 147–165. Retrieved from
บทความวิจัย (Research Article)
Author Biographies

Aekkapat Laksanacom, School of Development Economics, National Institute of Development Administration.

Ph.D Candidate

Udomsak Seenprachawong, School of Development Economics, National Institute of Development Administration.

Associate Professor


Arnberger, A., Aikoh, T., Eder, R., Shoji, Y., & Mieno, T. (2010). How many people should be in the urban forest? A comparison of trail preferences of Vienna and Sapporo forest visitor segments. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 9(3), 215-225.

Ben-Akiva, M. E., Lerman, S. R., & Lerman, S. R. (1985). Discrete choice analysis: theory and application to travel demand (Vol. 9). MIT press.

Bestard, À. B., & Font, A. R. (2009). Environmental diversity in recreational choice modelling. Ecological Economics, 68(11), 2743-2750.

Christie, M., Hanley, N., & Hynes, S. (2007). Valuing enhancements to forest recreation using choice experiment and contingent behaviour methods. Journal of Forest Economics, 13(2-3), 75-102.

Cochran W.G. & Cox G.M. (1957). Experimental designs, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, New York

Edwards, D. M., Jay, M., Jensen, F. S., Lucas, B., Marzano, M., Montagné, C., ... & Weiss, G. (2012). Public preferences across Europe for different forest stand types as sites for recreation. Ecology and Society, 17(1).

Ferraro, P. J., Lawlor, K., Mullan, K. L., & Pattanayak, S. K. (2020). Forest figures: Ecosystem services valuation and policy evaluation in developing countries. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy.

Gómez-Baggethun, E., & Barton, D. N. (2013). Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecological economics, 86, 235-245.

Hanemann, W. M. (1984). Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American journal of agricultural economics, 66(3), 332-341.

Hong, S. K., Kim, J. M., Jo, H. K., & Lee, S. W. (2018). Monetary valuation of urban forest attributes in highly developed urban environments: an experimental study using a conjoint choice model. Sustainability, 10(7), 2461.

Kongphunphin, C., & Srivanit, M. (2021). A multi-dimensional clustering applied to classify the typology of urban public parks in Bangkok Metropolitan Area, Thailand. Sustainability, 13(20), 11426.

Koo, J. C., Park, M. S., & Youn, Y. C. (2013). Preferences of urban dwellers on urban forest recreational services in South Korea. Urban forestry & urban greening, 12(2), 200-210.

Louviere, J. J., & Hout, M. (1988). Analyzing decision making: Metric conjoint analysis. (No. 67). Sage.

McFadden, D. (1973) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka, P., Ed., Frontiers in Econometrics, Academic Press, 105-142.

Nielsen, A. B., Olsen, S. B., & Lundhede, T. (2007). An economic valuation of the recreational benefits associated with nature-based forest management practices. Landscape and urban planning, 80(1-2), 63-71.

Nordh, H., Alalouch, C., & Hartig, T. (2011). Assessing restorative components of small urban parks using conjoint methodology. Urban forestry & urban greening, 10(2), 95-103.

Saptutyningsih, E., & Diswandi, D. (2019, December). Application of choice modelling on mangrove forest valuation in West Lombok, Indonesia. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 398, No. 1, p. 012012). IOP Publishing.

Seenprachawong, U. (2016). An economic valuation of coastal ecosystems in Phang Nga Bay, Thailand. In Marine and Coastal Ecosystem Valuation, Institutions, and Policy in Southeast Asia (pp. 71-91). Springer, Singapore.

Sriarkarin, S., & Lee, C. H. (2018). Integrating multiple attributes for sustainable development in a national park. Tourism Management Perspectives, 28, 113-125.

Tavárez, H., & Elbakidze, L. (2019). Valuing recreational enhancements in the San Patricio Urban Forest of Puerto Rico: A choice experiment approach. Forest Policy and Economics, 109, 102004.

Tyrväinen, L., Pauleit, S., Seeland, K., & Vries, S. D. (2005). Benefits and uses of urban forests and trees. In Urban forests and trees (pp. 81-114). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Xu, S., & He, X. (2022). Estimating the recreational value of a coastal wetland park: application of the choice experiment method and travel cost interval analysis. Journal of Environmental Management, 304, 114225