ECONOMICS UNIQUENESS

94 ■ THE ECONOMICS OF UNIQUENESS
but without the same cultural and historical dimensions. Th e authors conclude
that aesthetic and use attributes contribute to the explanation of the hypothetical
choices individuals made.
An example of a conjoint choice experiment recently undertaken by Willis
(2009) concerns a case study on the preferences of visitors in the management
of Hadrian’s Roman Wall (United Kingdom), with a particular view to
the interaction eff ects between the attributes of an archaeological or heritage
site. Th e study concludes that visitors to the Vindolanda site were clearly able
to state their preferences for the future management of the archaeological
site.
Finally, a very recent application of stated preference methods can be found
in a case study (Neuts and Nijkamp 2011a) on the critical evaluation attributes
of visitors of the historic city of Bruges in Belgium. Th is very popular tourist
destination is faced with severe congestion eff ects during the tourist high season,
which reduces visitors’ appreciation of the city.
Revealed Preference Methods
Th e following methods focus on market outcomes derived from real market
transactions. One important class is the travel cost method, based on the total
cost people are prepared to pay to visit a particular cultural site. Th e hedonic
price method is the price actors are willing to pay for real estate objects that
are considered as cultural heritage or are located in the proximity of such
objects (that is, an externality case). Th ese two approaches will be discussed
next.
Travel Cost Method
Visiting cultural heritage means that one has to travel to its location. Th e associated
travel cost—the fi nancial sacrifi ce to get there, including entry tickets
and accommodation costs—acts as a price for the visit and indicates the consumer’s
willingness to pay for the cultural heritage good. Th e costs of visiting
the cultural heritage good do not only refer to monetary outlays but also to the
time spent at the site and all other costs that stem from that visit (Navrud and
Ready 2002; Snowball 2008). Th e demand curve for the cultural heritage good
can be derived from the diff erences in travel costs incurred by diff erent classes
of visitors. In this way, one can use a traditional demand analysis, even if there
is not, strictly speaking, an unambiguous (ticket) price associated with the visit.
Th e travel cost method has some intrinsic problems. In the fi rst place, travel
cost methods are faced with the problem of multipurpose trips. A tourist visiting
several cultural heritage goods will fi nd it hard to distinguish which part of
the costs of the trip can be assigned to a particular cultural heritage good, as he