Source Notes
Title:
Summary:
Independent economist’s Jared Hardner and Bruce Mckenney present a 46 page report on the economic value of national forests from around the country. The report addresses the need for increased funding, preservation, and maintenance for the U.S. National Forest System.
The economic benefits of national parks.
Institutional.
What is it?
Report.
Publication Information:
Published by Hardner & Gullison Associates, LLC on May 30th, 2006.
Jared Hardner and Bruce Mckenney.
http://www.npca.org/park_assets/NPCA_Economic_Significance_Report.pdf
Accessed:
February 11th, 2009.
Support:
Researchers from Michigan State University.
Sonoran Institute for U.S. Bureau of Land Management, database: Economic Profile System (EPS).
Harvey Rosen, Ph.D. in Public Finance.
White House Office of Management and Budget (OBM).
Department of Justice.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Snytes and Sun.
USDA Forest Service.
A multitude of sources colaborate to illustrate the economic value of national forests around the country. Michigan State University researchers used a method called “Money Generation Model 2” to determine the economic value of national forests. The work concluded that “national park visitors spend 11.3 billion in areas local to national forests, resulting in $13.3 billion in economic activity, 267,000 jobs, and $75 billion in wages and profits. The Economic Profile System (EPS) provides country-level and demographic data from multiple public sources. “The data clearly shows the growth rates in counties around parks clearly out pace statewide averages.”
Audience & Agenda:
The NPCA is a non-profit organization that provides information on U.S. National Parks and campaigns to protect them (www.quantcast.com). With an audience of 27,089 U.S. monthly people, The NPCA attracts a more educated, fairly wealthy, and slightly female slanted crowd (www.quantcast.com).
Usefulness:
Drawing on one thousand estimates of the economic value derived from visitation to national parks and wilderness, this analysis uses accredited sources to assert the value of national park’s and consequently the report makes the argument for increased federal appropriations. According to public finance theory, government should raise funds necessary to invest in projects that generate value in excess of their cost. The National Park System generates at least four dollars to the public for every tax dollar appropriated for its budget with specific cases such as Acadia and Reyes Point where parks generate over 14 times the economic value. The estimated required budget for national park system is $3.4 billion. Annual appropriations for the National Park system average 2.6 billion. This falls short $800 million. National parks support $13.3 billion of local private-sector economic activity and 267,000 private-sector jobs. National parks attract businesses and individuals to the local area, resulting in economic growth in areas near parks that is an average of one percent per year greater than statewide rates over the past three decades. The document provides me with valuable quotes, data graphs, and an index of experts that support my argument. On quote in particular states: “Given the economic analysis, cutting park budgets cannot be described as prudent fiscal belt-tightening. Instead, it is undermining a public economic asset that will result in negative repercussions for U.S. citizens.”
Works cited:
www.quantcast.com
March 13, 2009 at 9:13 am |
[...] Institutional: “The U.S. National Park System: An Asset at Risk.” [...]