Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management Perspectives

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tmp

T
Integrating multiple attributes for sustainable development in a national
park
Supasit Sriarkarina,b, Chun-Hung Leea,
⁎

a
College of Environmental Studies, National Dong Hwa University, Hualien, 97401, Taiwan, ROC
b
Center for Advanced Studies in Tropical Natural Resources, NRU-KU, Kasetsart University, Chatuchak, Bangkok 10900, Thailand

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Balancing the sustainable development goals of nature conservation and recreational service provision is a big
Heterogeneity challenge for national park management today. We estimate tourist preferences on different attributes associated
Effective development with reduction of tourism effects and development of tourism facilities in Khao Yai National Park, Thailand. The
Policy scenario results indicate that integrated the wildlife conservation program, moderating control of tourist numbers, un-
Choice experiment
dertaking to provide good lodging services, and initiating a public transport system are effective development
Management strategy
factors. Characteristics that affect the differentiation of preferences vis-a-vis the visitor influx control in the
JEL classification: national park are: 1) tourists' awareness of the impacts of overcrowding, 2) nationality, and 3) monthly income.
Q26
These results could be used to tailor a unique policy and management strategy in the near future that corre-
Z32
sponds to the current issues and the needs of tourists.

1. Introduction
National parks have multiple functions, protecting natural areas and
ecosystem dynamics while providing recreation and nature education
to tourists (Badman & Bomhard, 2008). Tourism in nature-based at-
tractions has become a rapidly growing segment of the tourism sector
(Balmford et al., 2009; Haegeli & Pröbstl-Haider, 2016). In terms of
management, striking a balance between development that will satisfy
tourists while minimizing any possible conflicts with conservation areas
poses a big challenge for national park policy making nowadays
(Juutinen, Mitani, Mäntymaa, Shoji, Siikamaki, & Svento, 2011;
Lertwannawit & Anuwichanont, 2011). For the sustainable develop-
ment of a national park (hereinafter, SDNP), Arsić, Nikolić, & Živković
(2017) mentioned the importance of balancing environmental protec-
tion and economic development while focusing on control of tourist
numbers and provision of higher quality facilities to meet tourists’
needs. At the same time, national parks also fulfill multiple functions
for nature and ecotourism (Fennel & Nowaczek, 2010). Ecotourism has
emerged as a main foundational element for sustainable tourism op-
erations and can be used as a vehicle for striking the aforementioned
balance in the management of national parks and for raising the
awareness of tourists and locals alike about nature conservation (Tran,
Nomura & Yabe, 2015). However, successful ecotourism in a devel-
oping country is difficult to bring about, due to the prevalence of poorly
thought-out environmental policies with little concern for the damages
and attendant costs of tourism when it is characterized by mass tourist
influxes, overcrowding of areas with vehicle traffic, and excessive de-
velopment of tourism infrastructure (Gössling, 1999). To sum up, if the
goals of SDNP are to come to fruition, it is necessary to focus on tourism
in the context of the environment, conservation, and sustainable
tourism development (Xu & Fox, 2014). It has also been suggested that
tourists’ opinions and preferences can be taken into account and in-
tegrated into management strategies in combination with careful con-
sideration of the above factors (Reihanian, Mahmood, Kahrom, & Hin,
2012).
Thailand has great potential for nature-based tourism due to its rich
variety of landscapes, ranging from mountains to jungle to seashore. To
protect these important areas, the Thai government has instituted a
conservation system made up of 127 national parks, 58 wildlife sanc-
tuaries and other types of protected areas, such as forest parks and non-
hunting areas (Department of National Parks, 2016a). These protected
areas cover about 20.46 percent of the country's total area and are
administered by the Department of National Parks, Wildlife, and Plant
Conservation (hereinafter DNP) (DNP, 2016a). Thailand has used eco-
tourism to encourage sustainable tourism development since the early
2000s (Mahdayani, 2011). In the same period, the government also
launched a campaign promoting domestic tourism in national parks. As
a result, some national parks have had to confront insufficient

⁎
Corresponding author at: College of Environmental Studies, National Dong Hwa University, No. 1, Sec. 2, Da Hsueh Rd. Shoufeng, Hualien, 97401, Taiwan, ROC
E-mail address: chlee@gms.ndhu.edu.tw (C.-H. Lee).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2018.08.007

2211-9736/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Received 7 September 2017; Received in revised form 13 August 2018; Accepted 14 August 2018
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee
development budgets, limitations on staff services, and management
issues such as overcrowding and waste problems (Gössling, 1999;
Mahdayani, 2011).
The DNP has attempted to control the increasing the number of
tourists visiting national parks by creating an online accommodation
reservation system (Mahdayani, 2011) and has been studying tourism
carrying capacity in so-called pilot national parks, however, the suc-
cessful promotion of tourism and the resulting challenges stemming
from the corresponding growth in the number of visitors to national
parks represent a paradoxical situation. For example, tourist congestion
is a critical issue in popular national parks, including Khao Yai National
Park (KYNP), the first national park designated in Thailand
(Phumsathan, 2013). Allowing mass numbers of tourists into protected
areas can cause many deleterious effects on the environment
(Phumsathan, 2013) such as soil compaction, water pollution, and
disturbance to wildlife habitats. Moreover, the deterioration of these
resources can greatly affect the quality of tourists’ experience (Deng,
Qiang, Walker & Zhang, 2003). Modes of operation that recognize the
value of both nature and services is therefore needed for the sustainable
and effective management of protected areas (Juutinen et al., 2011).
Thus, there is a requirement to understand tourists' preferences and
behavioral tradeoffs when planning the development of national parks,
as such understanding will help the responsible authorities to design
and implement suitable strategies while simultaneously promoting en-
vironmental conservation and mitigating tourism impacts.
Turning to issues related specifically to ecotourism and manage-
ment for national parks, past related studies have focused on topics
such as wildlife conservation and human impacts (Höffken, 2010;
Orams, 2002; Panusittikorn & Prato, 2001), controlling tourist numbers
and carrying capacity (León, de León, Araña, & González, 2015;
Newman, Manning, Dennis & McKonly, 2005; Sunlu, 2003;
Saminpanya, Wisarttavisit, & Chumnankid, 2009; Whittaker, Shelby,
Meldrum, DeGroot & Bacon, 2012), information provision via inter-
pretation boards and tourist centers (Gössling, 1999; Juutinen et al.,
2011; Phumsathan, 2013), lodging services and accommodation con-
ditions (Gössling, 1999; Mahdayani, 2011; Zong, Cheng, Lee, & Hsu,
2017), environmental quality and public transportation design (Deng
et al., 2003; Lee & Wang, 2017; Mahdayani, 2011; White, 2007), and
charging entrance fees to provide financial support for sustainable de-
velopment in protected areas (Gössling, 1999; Hearne & Santos, 2005;
Laengcharoen, 2014; Lee & Wang, 2017; Juutinen et al., 2011). Based
on a review of the literature, this study found a paucity of extant re-
search employing a framework comprising multiple attributes related to
sustainable development in the national park field, and more specifi-
cally, one aimed at estimating tourists’ preferences on multiple attri-
butes related to a national park.
Based on the above review and summarization, it is clearly im-
portant to establish an effective management mechanism for sustain-
able development in national parks, which, at the same time, reflects
tourists' preferences among a number of potential sustainable devel-
opment programs. Furthermore, there is a need to understand any
significant differences in preferences between local and foreign tourists
when it comes to specific identified attributes of sustainable develop-
ment, to evaluate whether or not the level of heterogeneity in terms of
tourists' preference is linked to their social background and their be-
havior during the trip under, and to incorporate the values they attach
to different scenarios into future national park management ap-
proaches. By doing so, we could develop an effective management
strategy for the national park in question which captures tourists’ var-
ious preferences for multiple attributes (ecological, recreational, and
institutional) of sustainable development. This would also help park
managers to establish effective management programs to meet the goal
of sustainability and build up an adaptive budget allocation model in
the national park.
Therefore, the objectives of this paper are, firstly, to assess the set of
management and development attributes regarding tourism services in
114
Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125
the national park by gathering evidence via what is known as the
economic valuation technique, namely a choice experiment, for esti-
mating the preferences of visitors. Secondly, to investigate the hetero-
geneity of these preferences across the population of visitors, which can
be useful for targeting specific groups of visitors in accordance with
their specific characteristics, and for the design of policy measures. Our
study adopts a similar approach to that of Juutinen et al. (2011) and
León et al. (2015) for resolving tourism issues in protected areas by
using a choice experiment (CE) with complex management. However,
our study differs from the previous studies by improving the recrea-
tional services component, by proposing the initiation of a public
transportation system inside the national park. This research can also be
an example of an empirical study carried out with the CE technique in
the field of protected area management. We separate this paper into
five sections. In Section 2, we provide an overview of the study site,
discuss CE in protected area management, describe our experimental
design for the development of ecotourism and facilities in a national
park, and set out models and hypothetical scenarios for future man-
agement. In Section 3, the results of tourists’ preferences and social
welfare are analyzed, and the heterogeneity of tourist demographics is
also presented and discussed. Section 4 would summarize the main
research results and conclusion. The final section provides the man-
agement strategy and suggestions for policy implementation.
2. Research area and method
2.1. Study site
KYNP, established in 1962, is one of the best-known national parks
in Thailand (Saminpanya et al., 2009), covering an area of 216,800
hectares spanning four provinces in the northeast of the country: Na-
khon Nayok, Prachinburi, Saraburi, and Nakhon Ratchasima (See
Fig. 1). The park has two main access roads; one from the north (Sarn
Chao Por Gate) and one from the south (Nern Hom Gate), both leading
to the central area. These entrance gates are at least a three hour (about
200 kilometers) drive from Bangkok and are easily accessible from
other major cities nearby (Mahdayani, 2011). KYNP has a variety of
landscapes and forest types including grassland, deciduous forest, and
evergreen forest (Panusittikorn & Prato, 2001). These natural condi-
tions provide a rich biodiversity to KYNP, and the park contains many
globally and locally important wildlife species such as tigers, pileated
gibbons, Asian elephants, dholes, and great hornbills (Royal Thai
Government, 2004). Owing to the uniqueness and importance of its
natural resources, KYNP was declared a part of a UNESCO Natural
World Heritage Site in 2005 and named the Dong Phayayen-KhaoYai
Forest Complex (World Heritage Committee, 2005). Popular recrea-
tional activities include adventure and outdoor activities such as hiking,
trekking, wildlife watching, and waterfall sightseeing (Panusittikorn &
Prato, 2001), while bicycling and night safari are also increasing in
popularity (Mahdayani, 2011). KYNP can provide daily lodging for up
to 450 people in four zones and camping for up to 1,400 people in two
campgrounds, based on availability figures from the online reservation
system in 2016. Additionally, temporary campgrounds are reserved for
1,000–1,500 people during the peak-season in December to January
(Mahdayani, 2011). Nevertheless, the annual and maximum daily in-
flux of tourists reached over 1.23 million and 20,000, respectively, in
2015 (DNP, 2016b). To sum up, KYNP fulfills a variety of functions for
natural conservation, recreational experience, and environmental edu-
cation; however, the park is also facing the issues of wildlife con-
servation, carrying capacity, and diminishing recreational quality.
Thus, this study chose KYNP as a research locus to analyze the selected
aspects of sustainable development in a national park.
2.2. Choice experiments in the field of protected area management
In the past few decades, economic tools have been applied to inform
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee
Fig. 1. Map of Khao Yai National Park, Thailand, and location of data collection.
Please choose the best preference choice in this choice set.
decision making in terms of protected area management. Among the
methodologies used in the nonmarket evaluation field, the contingent
valuation method (CVM) has emerged as a tool belonging to the stated
preference techniques (Mitchell and Carson, 1989; Haab and
McConnell, 2002). The CVM usually asks respondents to deliberate on
at least a single valuation question which compares to the present si-
tuation (i.e. status quo) with a hypothetical scenario (Lee & Han, 2002;
Rolfe, Bennett & Louviere 2002; Tyrvaynen & Vaanenen, 1998). How-
ever, the CVM has the potential to introduce strategic and hypothetical
bias since it is possible respondents will intentionally misrepresent their
feelings in their answers, as well as being vulnerable to compliance
bias, which means respondents may be naturally inclined to answer
‘yes’ in the context of marginal willingness to pay (MWTP) related
scenarios when CVM is used (Barala, Sternb, & Bhattarai, 2008; Bennett
& Blamey, 2001; Lee, Lee, Kim, & Mjelde, 2010). The latter phenom-
enon is also commonly called the "yea-saying bias" (Hanley, Wright,
and Koop, 2002).
The CE method possesses several advantages, in that the former uses
115
Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125
the same stated preference technique as the CVM, albeit in the form a
series of choice sets in which the respondent can consider a related
scenario and choose an option from a pool of potential substitution
goods (Hanley et al., 2002; Juutinen et al., 2011; Rolfe, Bennett, &
Louviere, 2002; Zong et al., 2017). Furthermore, CE lets the re-
spondents face a better realistic trade-off between any opportunity
costs, and minimizes some biases such as the hidden goodness of in-
terest within the pool of practicable goods and services (Lee & Wang,
2017; Rolfe et al., 2002). The CE is a quantitative technique that is
widely used in various fields of empirical studies, including environ-
mental valuation, to elicit with qualitative data. Typically, respondents
presented with a hypothetical profile in term of attributes and levels
and need to select their most preferred option from among a series of
choice alternatives and the status quo (Alpízar, Carlsson & Martinsson,
2001; Hanley et al., 2001). Attribute and level characteristics are de-
signed from the relevant characteristics of goods and services in the
program. The indispensable attribute is a cost attribute (such as money
donation or an entrance fee) used for estimating the MWTP value (Khai
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee
& Yabe, 2015). Respondents will face a trade-off decision between
maintaining the present situation and paying for a new potential si-
tuation (Hanley, Wright, & Adamowicz, 1998).
CE studies have been carried out in many protected areas, such as
the Hearme & Salinas (2002) study of preferences between local and
foreign tourists for an ecotourism development at Braulio Carrillo Na-
tional Park. They revealed that foreigners had higher support for more
information provision and were more sensitive to tourist congestion
than local tourists. Juutinen et al. (2011) examined tourists’ preferences
on conflicting management approaches in Finland. The results showed
that tourists had a high MWTP for initially paying an entrance fee of
about €18 per person for enhanced services in the form of biodiversity
and information boards, reducing the number of tourists in the park,
and maintaining the current number of resting places. In a study by
Chaminuka, Groeneveld, Selomane, & van Ierland (2012), CE with a
conditional probit model was applied to determine tourists’ preferences
on rural ecotourism in a national park and adjacent communities in
South Africa. It was found that tourists had an unwillingness to use
accommodation services outside the national park but preferred to use
tour services and visit local-craft markets provided by the villages. León
et al. (2015) used CE with heterogeneity and segment analysis to in-
vestigate mitigating tourist congestion and improving the ecosystem
and quality of life of local peoples in the National Park of Rosario and
San Bernardo. The results regarding tourists' preferences provided va-
luable insights for the island's policy-makers, with findings showing
that the highest support values were for coral reef conservation, con-
trolling the number of tourists, and boosting locals' incomes. These CE
studies succeeded in determining the tourists' preferences in the context
of recreational management and related issues in protected areas and
national parks (Guimarães et al., 2014; Juutinen et al., 2011; Zong
et al., 2017). To sum up, the present research is using CE to construct an
empirical model regarding the multiple aspects of sustainable devel-
opment in a national park.
2.3. Hypothetical choice experiment design
Based on the research framework of the CE model (Alpízar et al.,
2001; Chamiunka et al., 2012; Hanley et al., 2002; Hearme & Salinas,
2002; Juutinen et al., 2011; Lee & Wang, 2017; León et al., 2015; Zong
et al., 2017), we used the CE methodology to establish a sustainable
development framework for KYNP. In considering the appropriate
foundation for sustainable development in this national park, we based
the attributes and levels on the literature review and choices were in-
formed by the considered perspectives of researchers on wildlife con-
servation, recreational experience, and institutional management.
Second, this study used on-site face-to-face interviews with focus group
discussions (FGDs) with individuals including the manager of a local
village, members of NGOs, park managers, and social-economists from
the area surrounding KYNP (Lee & Wang, 2017; Zong et al., 2017), and
we selected six attributes with respect to national park management.
Third, a pretest survey was conducted in KYNP with 25 Thai re-
spondents during the period of July to August of 2015 to uncover any
possible misunderstandings or potential problems related to the ques-
tionnaire itself. Following the pretesting, the final questionnaires were
distributed in September 2015. Attribute design in this study is com-
prised of five alternative components related to development of park
services and tourism facilities, including recreational, educational, and
infrastructure facilities, and one trade-off situation with several po-
tential entrance fee rates, as described in Table 1. The attribute design
reflects careful consideration of the existing literature and media re-
ports on tourism and environmental issues in KYNP, along with dis-
cussions with academics and DNP authorities about practical solutions
to existing problems in the park.
2.3.1. Wildlife conservation
Wildlife conservation is a particularly important function at KYNP
116
Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125
due to the biodiversity and endangered species within the park
(Panusittikorn & Prato, 2001). The park uses several operations to
maintain wildlife populations (e.g. artificial salt licks, grassland man-
agement, patrols, and wildlife corridors). However, KYNP faces many
threats affecting the well-being of native wildlife, including wildlife
poaching and illegal logging (Höffken, 2010) as well as the bad beha-
vior of some tourists (e.g. illegal wildlife feeding and smuggling pets
with diseases into national parks) (Orams, 2002). We set three possible
situations of wildlife conservation in KYNP: current management, in-
tensive management, and poor management. We then convert the re-
sults of preferences for management into a change in wildlife popula-
tion owing to conservation levels, with this change taking the form of
either a decrease in wildlife population of 10% or an increase in wildlife
population of 10%. Additionally, we present 10 species of large im-
portant mammals in KYNP to easily understand the change in con-
servation levels (Appendix A).
2.3.2. Controlling tourist numbers
The New Year holidays and some long vacations in winter are the
most crowded periods in KYNP, and see facilities for tourists (lodgings,
camping areas, toilets, roads, and parking lots) at over capacity
(Saminpanya et al., 2009), creating the appearance that there is little
control over the volume of visitors in the park. Overcrowding by
tourists can degrade an environment (Sunlu, 2003) and tourist experi-
ences (Newman et al., 2005). Capacity control is clearly a necessary
approach to reducing the impact of overcrowding from tourism
(Whittaker et al., 2012; León et al., 2015). We therefore decided upon
three choices: maintaining the status quo level of control, reducing the
number of tourists by 25%, and reducing the number of tourists 50%,
based on the maximum daily visitor influx in 2015. This allows us to
understand tourist preferences and behaviors regarding strengthening
levels of capacity control in KYNP.
2.3.3. Information provision
Providing environmental knowledge and raising awareness on the
part of both tourists and local residents is a key factor that enables
successful ecotourism development (Gössling, 1999; Juutinen et al.,
2011). KYNP provides ecological knowledge via interpretation boards
located along nature trails and at scenic viewpoints, exhibitions in the
visitor center, and official tour guides available to lead trekking and
night safari activities. The park also provides information about park
regulations and prohibitions throughout the tourist service zone.
However, studies on impact perception in KYNP have shown that
visitors do not have a high level of awareness of the impacts of tourism
and related visitor activities, such as air and water pollution
(Phumsathan, 2013). KYNP management needs to think more about
effective environmental education to reduce the ecological impact of
tourism (Phumsathan, 2013). Providing more sources of ecological
knowledge and increasing awareness of national park regulations may
therefore be an important process for strengthening sustainable eco-
tourism in KYNP. In this experiment, we set four possible alternatives to
understand tourists’ preferences in terms of the hypothetical develop-
ment of information board provision, in the form of four alternative
scenarios for adding ecological information boards and/or regulation
information boards in the tourism zone in KYNP.
2.3.4. Lodging services
KYNP lodging services are crowded and fully booked during winter
vacation. Moreover, annual government funding is often insufficient for
the operation and maintenance of national parks (Gössling, 1999).
Tourists may encounter some unavailable room facilities such as unu-
sable bathrooms, boilers or permanently dirty bed sheets, while busi-
ness accommodations outside the park can provide newer rooms and
good services (Mahdayani, 2011). Against such a backdrop, it has been
found that tourists show an increasing preference for higher quality
accommodation in community-based ecotourism setting (Zong et al.,
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125

Table 1
Attributes and levels description in the choice experiment.
Attribute Description Levels Description Variable

Wildlife conservation Wildlife conservation operation that influences 10 large Decrease Decrease of 10% in populations and some species WildCons–
mammal species within KYNP. extinct in the park
Present state Status quo, 10 large mammal species in KYNP WildCons⁎
Increase Increase of 10% in species populations WildCons+
Tourist number control Control number of tourists in KYNP during the peak Less control Status quo, allow overcrowding, tourists can VisitContr⁎
season. reach over 20,000 people per day
Medium control Decrease of 25% from total VisitContr+
High control Decrease of 50% from total VisitContr+ +

Information provision Ecological knowledge and park regulations provision in Present state Status quo Info⁎
KYNP. More ecological Increase ecological interpretation boards InfoKnow
knowledge
More informing park Increase public relations and boards with park InfoRegu
regulations regulations
More the both Increase provision of both types of information InfoKnow&Regu
information
Lodging service Room services available for tourists in KYNP. Present state Status quo, a chance encounter some room Lodge⁎
facilities unavailable and rooms service often full.
Good maintenance Maintain rooms and facilities in good condition LodgeMaintain
More room Construct additional accommodation but more LodgeConstruct
construction deforestation
Public transport system The transport system service transfers tourists from gates No operation Status quo, use personal vehicle to the accessible Transport⁎
to tourist center, lodging area, and main attractions areas and have some potential traffic jams.
within KYNP Operating Initiate the public transport system and can Transport+
reduce some impacts from traffic
Entrance feesa Entrance fees for daily visit to KYNP, B40 for Thai Current rate Status quo, no payment currently changed Payment⁎
tourists and B400 for foreigners Increase 25% Thai B50, foreigner B500
Increase 50% Thai B60, foreigner B600
Increase 75% Thai B70, foreigner B700
Increase 100% Thai B80, foreigner B800

a
1 US Dollar = 35.88 Thai Baht (B) based on the average monthly exchange rate during September 2015 to February 2016 (Bank of Thailand, 2016).
⁎
The basic level of the alternatives, and the superscripts +, –, – – indicate an increase, decrease, and strong decrease compared with the basic level.

2017) KYNP is facing an acute accommodation service challenge. Three
levels were therefore created to reflect how KYNP might improve its
lodging services to meet the needs of tourists by increasing facilities,
increasing room maintenance or building more rooms to accommodate
visitors.
2.3.5. Public transport system
Provision of transportation service is a new option for KYNP. Most
tourists have to use their personal vehicles to access the attraction sites
and accommodations in the park's core area. The increased numbers of
tourists and vehicles have negative effects on the environment and
tourism in KYNP (Mahdayani, 2011) such as traffic congestion, full
parking lots, air pollution, bad tourist experiences, and interference
with or harm to wildlife. Initiating an efficient public transport system
could mitigate these environmental effects (White, 2007). Therefore,
this attribute can be set for two levels, namely whether or not to operate
a transportation system inside the park. Vans or minibuses are re-
presentative of the vehicles in the scenario due to the steep and winding
road near the Sarn Chao Por Gate.
2.3.6. Entrance fee
The national park revenues of Thailand are mainly derived from
admission charges and tourism activity expenses. Entrance fees and
expenditures inside the national park can provide financial incentives
back to national park management and local communities (Gössling,
1999; Hearne & Santos, 2005). Therefore, an entrance fee is appropriate
to use for the monetary attribute in this study. The entrance fees for
adult Thai citizens and foreigners (aged over 18 years) in KYNP are,
respectively, 40 Baht and 400 Baht per visit per person, which means
KYNP was able to generate revenue over 88 million Baht in 2015 (DNP,
2016a). The DNP will return at least 15% of total revenue to the ori-
ginal national park for its operation and development; furthermore, the
remaining revenues are mainly earmarked for project development of
the entire national park, employee training programs, and the reserved
budget (Laengcharoen, 2014). The five alternatives in terms of the
entrance fee were set to including the present rate and increases from
25% to 100% over the current amounts.
The combination of all attributes in the experimental design pro-
duced 1,080 possible alternatives (3 * 3 * 4 * 3 * 2 * 5 = 1080). An or-
thogonal main effect design was used to reduce possible combinations;
an approach which has an advantage as a statistical design technique
(Hanley et al., 1998) and is commonly used in choice modeling studies
(Juutinen et al., 2011). Then, 25 possible alternatives, including the
current situation, were selected in this study. The selected alternatives
were randomly sorted into three options (i.e. choice sets) in which each
choice set had two proposed options, the status quo option, and a "no
comment" option (Fig. 2). The first three choice sets were sorted in the
first version of the questionnaire and so on, generating a total of 92
unique versions of the questionnaire. This process was used to reduce
bias by selecting the choice set and provide credibility to the sequen-
cing of questions series of the questionnaires (Juutinen et al., 2011).
Therefore, respondents would be faced with three choice set questions
and needed to select their most favored options or choose "no comment"
for each.
The attributes and levels were developed after discussion with na-
tional park officers from KYNP and the pretest. The final version of the
questionnaires was composed of three parts. The first part contained the
introduction and questions related to trip behaviors: type of visit, time
spent, activities, and satisfaction with KYNP services. The second part
contained three CE questions which included three options. This part
also explained information about the overcrowding problem and the
current situation of KYNP as it related to the attributes of the CE and
contained questions regarding the attitudes of respondents toward these
overcrowding problems. The last part contained questions about tour-
ists’ socio-economic characteristics. All versions of the questionnaire
were prepared in both English and Thai languages.

117
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee
Fig. 2. Example of a choice set question for foreign tourists.
2.4. Models
The CE or discrete choice model is derived from consumer behavior,
and also can be used to estimate levels of utility from apparent and
intrinsic characteristics of goods and services (McFadden, 1973). The
random utility model can be represented in a linear form by:
Uni = βni Xni + εni (1)
assuming that Uni is the utility function that combines observable and
unobservable utilities for an individual n and alternative i, while Xni are
the observable factors or level of attribute that makes up the
118
Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125
alternative, βni is a coefficient associated with the level, and εni is the
unobservable utility, which is treated as a random component or error
term (Louviere, Hensher & Swait, 2000).
The CE can estimate preferences for the various attributes and re-
veal relationships between respondent characteristics and elements in
the scenario (Rolfe et al., 2002). Fundamentally, the conditional logit
(CL) model is a basis of CE analysis used to demonstrate the average
preferences whereby the parameters are defined as constants for all
respondents (Juutinan et al., 2011). A mixed logit model or random
parameters logit (RPL) model, extended from the CL model, can be used
in multiple discrete choices with a partial simulation model (Train,
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee
2003). The RPL model is a highly flexible model that can thoroughly
estimate the individual preference for each attribute (Juutinan et al.,
2011). Thus, these parameters can be used to consider the individual
heterogeneity of welfare effects on the choice-relevant preferences
across the respondents' information. The latent class model can also
capture the preference heterogeneity of a population by estimating
preferences across complicated classes (Shoji & Tsuge, 2015). The
homogenous preference is overlaid on a specific segment, in which the
segment membership is influenced by the attitudinal, behavioral, and
socio-economic characteristics of the population (Lee & Wang, 2017;
Zong et al., 2017).
The RPL and the latent class models are widely used for assessing
preference heterogeneity in applied economics (Jones, Alexander,
Widmar, Ricker-Gilbert & Lowenberg-DeBoer, 2016) including valua-
tion of protected areas and environmental management in studies such
as the ones by Juutinen et al. (2011) and Kaczan, Swallow &
Adamowicz (2013). In this study, we applied the RPL and the latent
class models to examine the preference heterogeneity across a sample of
potentially differentiated tourists via choice scenarios related to the
development of recreational facilities and the reduction of tourist im-
pacts in KYNP. For assessing the suitability of the model, Chi-square
distribution along with the degrees of freedom of parameters were used
for checking the statistical criterion, while a log-likelihood function
expressed in terms of McFadden pseudo R2 i was used to explain the
goodness-of-fit of the model (Vojáček & Pecáková, 2010).
Based on Section 2.3 and Table 1, the estimated utility function of
the national park development preference can be written as in Eq. (1)
and represented in terms of a linear function as:
Vi = ASC + β1WCons i + β2 Visiti + β3 Infori + β4 Lodgei + β5 Trans i
+ β6 Entrai (2)
where Vi is the utility function associated with alternative i. ASC is the
alternative-specific constant or a dummy for the status quo option. ASC
is a variable to capture the mean effect of unobservable utility in the
error terms for each alternative (Khai & Yabe, 2015). βi is an estimated
coefficient of alternative i. If the respondents choose the status quo
option, ASCi = 1, otherwise ASCi = 0. The other independent variables
are as follows: WConsi is the change in wildlife population owing to
conservation levels, represented by either a decrease in population by
10% to an increase in population of 10% (0 or 1 variable); Visiti is the
level of tourist control during the high tourist season in KYNP in the
form of a reduction of 25% to 50% from the total (0 or 1 variable);
Infori is the increase in information provision for ecological knowledge
and park regulations (0 or 1 variable); Lodgei is the development of
services for maintenance and construction of rooms (0 or 1 variable);
Transi is the transport system service inside the KYNP (0 or 1 variable);
Entrai is the entrance fee amount (40, 50, 60, 70, 80 Baht for domestic
tourists and 400, 500, 600, 700, 800 Baht for foreign tourists).
The MWTP for any alternative is estimated by the ratio of the
coefficient associated with the attribute (βattribute) and coefficient of the
payment parameter (βpayment) (Hearne & Salinas, 2002) and shown as:
βattribute
Marginal WTP for attribute =
−βpayment (3)
2.5. Hypothetical scenarios for future management
The CE method has been followed in cases of multiple land use
scenarios in semi-watersheds (García-Llorente et al., 2012), recreation
reduction scenarios in bird-watching areas (Guimarães et al., 2014),
welfare estimation for land use programs in a forest park (Lee & Wang,
2017), and economic evaluation with multiple tour package scenarios
for management of a forest park (Zong et al., 2017). The above studies
used the empirical results and successfully designed a variety of sce-
narios based on the selected focal attributes and levels. To sum up, this
119
Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125
study set the hypothetical park management scenarios based on the
chosen quality improvement attributes in KYNP. We calculated the
MWTP based on the RPL results by using Eq. (3), and derived the park
management scenarios by comparing the alternative options to the
status quo. Evaluating multiple national park scenarios can provide a
rich trove of potential information for decision-making in the national
park. The four scenarios for the possible national park programs are
summarized as follows:
• Scenario I—Conservation and crowding reduction: This program
focuses on increasing the wildlife conservation and controlling the
influx of visitors by implementing a 25% reduction in the number of
tourists. As for the lodging service and public transport system, we
keep the status quo.
• Scenario II—Crowding reduction and good lodging service: This
scenario focuses on controlling the influx of visitors by im-
plementing a 25% reduction in the number of tourists and main-
taining rooms and facilities in good condition. The wildlife con-
servation and public transport system maintain the status quo.
• Scenario III—Tourism facilities development: Based on enhancing
the equipment and services, this program aims to maintain the
rooms and facilities in good condition and initiate a public transport
system. Wildlife conservation and controlling tourist numbers keep
the status quo.
• Scenario IV—Integrated ecotourism development: With the goal of
balancing the ecological and recreational aspects in a potential na-
tional park management program, we increase the wildlife con-
servation, control the influx of visitors by implementing a 25% re-
duction in the number of tourists, maintain rooms and facilities in
good condition, and initiate the public transport system in the near
future.
2.6. Survey and data
The sample population of this study was made up of Thai and for-
eign visitors who were over 18 years old. Face-to-face interviews in the
form of a formal survey were conducted with 713 non-randomly se-
lected respondents during the period from September 2015 to February
2016, which covered both off-peak (non-crowded) and peak (over-
crowded) periods in KYNP. The questionnaires were distributed and
collected at popular locations throughout the KYNP service zone in-
cluding the tourist center, camping sites, lodging areas, the Haew Narok
waterfall nature trail, and the 30 KM Marker scenic viewpoint (Fig. 1).
Of these, only 663 questionnaires completed by 593 domestic and 70
foreign respondents could be used in the database analysis due to others
being incompletely filled out or as a result of inconsistent answers being
perfunctorily given without the respondent really considering the
choice sets. A summary of the statistical data gathered is shown in
Table 2. The appropriateness of the database was not statistically sig-
nificantly different with regard to gender and age of respondents, with a
95% confidence interval in the proportion of gender (Pearson Chi-
Square test, χ2 = 0.017, df = 1, p = 0.896) and the age of respondents
(Independent samples t-test, t = 1.820, df = 661, p = 0.069).
3. Results
3.1. Estimating the tourists' preference function for the national park
The estimated coefficients of the CL and RPL models are shown in
Table 3. Considering the coefficients of the CL models, all attribute
levels are significant at the 10% level except for the ASC and the at-
tribute levels corresponding to increasing provision of ecological
knowledge (InfoKnow) and information about park regulations (In-
foRegu). Therefore, fully interpreting the tourists' preferences and WTP
for the attribute of information provision is unfeasible due to the failure
of the results for these attributes to meet the threshold for significance
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125

Table 2 model (Swait & Louviere, 1993). Thus,

Demographics of survey respondents in Khao Yai National Park, Thailand. SLLR = –2[–1604.641–(–1465.118)] = 279.046, which exceeds the
Characteristic All tourists Domestic Foreign critical value of the Chi-square distribution of 24.725 for the 0.01 sig-
tourists tourists nificance level and eleven degrees of freedom, given that the degrees of
freedom are calculated from the difference in the number of parameters
Number 663 593 70
between both models. Therefore, SLLR also supports that the RPL model
Male 56.41% 56.32% 57.12%
Mean age (standard 34.64 34.89 (10.03) 32.57 (10.55)
is more appropriate than the CL model.
deviation) (10.10)
Married 48.72% 50.25% 35.71%
Education
3.2. Analysis of the welfare effects
High school or lower 25.19% 22.60% 47.14%
Undergraduate 55.20% 59.53% 18.57% In Table 4, we show the estimation results of marginal WTP from
Graduate or above 19.61% 17.87% 34.29% the significant parameters in the RPL model with 95% confidence in-
Monthly income
tervals. As expected, respondents prioritize the change in wildlife po-
Missing data 15 0 15
Less than 15,000 Baht 18.82% 19.22% 14.55% pulation in KYNP. Tourists are willing to pay a bundled fee of 476.61
15,001–25,000 Baht 26.39% 27.49% 14.55 % Baht/time/person to increase the wildlife population by 10% by means
25,001–35,000 Baht 21.30% 22.26% 10.90% of intensive conservation action. In contrast, there is a strong negative
Above 35,001 Baht 33.49% 31.03% 60.00%
effect on the scenario entailing diminishing the wildlife species popu-
Visited KYNP in previous year 50.08% 54.13% 15.71%
lation in KYNP. Limiting the number of tourists is one potential scenario
for reducing the negative impact of tourism in KYNP. All respondents
in the CL model and the RPL. The Log-likelihood and McFadden Pseudo are willing to pay about 57 Baht/time/person to control the tourist
R2 values show that the model fit is acceptable for a discrete choice influx, with the medium-level of control receiving a slightly higher
model (McFadden, 1978). The positive sign of any significant level preference than other levels. Interestingly, foreign tourists prefer the
implies that the respondents were more likely to support that attribute strictest control of the number of tourists, accounting for an increase in
and had a willingness to pay for such an option. Options with positive their WTP of about 28% in comparison with the local tourists. The
signs included: 1) increased wildlife conservation, 2) all levels of con- results for the lodging service attribute reveal a clear message for park
trolling the number of tourists during high season, 3) good maintenance management, in that respondents are willing to support low-impact
of lodging services, 4) increasing the provision of information about development with a payment of 94.29 Baht/time/person for good
both ecology and national park regulations, 5) and initiating the public quality of rooms and services, but showed no preference for lodging
transport service. In contrast, a significant negative sign informs us that area expansion which would entail deforestation. Finally, tourists in
the tourists had no willingness to pay for an attribute. Attributes found this survey are willing to pay 56.96 Baht/time/person for a public
to have negative signs were: 1) diminishing wildlife conservation, and transport system inside the national park.
2) constructing additional visitor accommodations in the KYNP.
The significant variables in the RPL model had the same signs and 3.3. Effects of preference heterogeneity
showed a similar pattern in terms of magnitude as those in the CL
model. Moreover, the negative sign of an ASC coefficient indicates that According to the significance of the standard deviations of the
the respondents would not prefer the current situation or status quo of coefficients in the RPL, there is an indication that the tastes of the re-
KYNP regarding the attribute in question. spondents may vary in the population (Train, 1998). The results show
As for goodness-of-fit, the RPL is a better fit than the CL model due that tourists have different WTP for the current situation and the al-
to the greater Log-likelihood and McFadden Pseudo R2 values. The ternative attributes, including decreasing wildlife conservation, tourist
Swait–Louviere log-likelihood ratio (SLLR) test can clarify the level of number control, and the public transport system. The demographic and
equality between these logit models by using the formula trip behavior variables are applied to the heterogeneous classification
SLLR = −2[LL1 − LL2], where LLn is the log-likelihood value in each analysis.

Table 3
Results of conditional logit and random parameters logit models in Khao Yai National Park, Thailand.
Attributes and levels Conditional logit model Random parameters logit model

Coeff. Std. error Coeff. Std. error Coeff. std. Std. error

ASC 0.159 0.152 –0.686 ⁎⁎

0.319 2.224⁎⁎⁎
0.347
WildCons– –1.864⁎⁎⁎ 0.074 –4.228⁎⁎⁎ 0.523 1.275⁎⁎⁎ 0.271
WildCons+ 1.213⁎⁎⁎ 0.064 2.721⁎⁎⁎ 0.349 – –
VisitContr+ 0.128⁎⁎ 0.057 0.329⁎⁎⁎ 0.123 0.702⁎⁎⁎ 0.234
VisitContr++ 0.206⁎⁎⁎ 0.067 0.320⁎⁎ 0.146 0.929⁎⁎⁎ 0.321
InfoKnow 0.069 0.076 0.005 0.155 0.670⁎ 0.365
InfoRegu –0.010 0.080 0.138 0.162 – –
InfoKnow&Regu 0.151⁎ 0.078 0.106 0.179 1.130⁎⁎⁎ 0.298
LodgeMaintain 0.311⁎⁎⁎ 0.056 0.538⁎⁎⁎ 0.127 – –
LodgeConstruct –0.194⁎⁎⁎ 0.071 –0.532⁎⁎⁎ 0.161 – –
Transport+ 0.234⁎⁎⁎ 0.044 0.337⁎⁎⁎ 0.108 1.291⁎⁎⁎ 0.214
Payment –0.002⁎⁎ 0.001 –0.006⁎⁎⁎ 0.002
Model properties
Chi squared – 1400.494
Log-likelihood –1604.641 –1465.118
McFadden Pseudo R2 0.258 0.323
Choice sets 1971 1971
Parameters 12

, ,
⁎⁎⁎ ⁎⁎ ⁎
are significance differences at p < 0.001, p < 0.05, and p < 0.1, respectively.

120
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125

Table 4
Average of willingness to pay of each attribute and the 95% confidence interval from the random parameters logit models in Khao Yai National Park, Thailand.
Attributes and levels Average marginal WTPa (range of the 95% confidence interval)

All tourists (n = 663) Domestic tourists (n = 593) Foreign tourists (n = 70)

ASC –120.33 (–136.77, –103.89) –116.47 (–133.84, –99.10) –154.70 (–205.11, –104.29)
WildCons – –743.39 (–751.03, –735.74) –745.26 (–753.30, –737.22) –726.73 (–751.18, –702.28)
WildCons + 476.61 (475.12, 478.11) 476.10 (474.84, 477.95) 478.55 (473.21, 483.88)
VisitContr + 57.83 (54.65, 61.01) 56.57 (53.20, 59.94) 69.03 (59.83, 78.22)
VisitContr + + 57.08 (52.49, 61.66) 55.25 (50.41, 60.09) 73.28 (59.59, 86.96)
LodgeMaintain 94.29 (94.15, 94.43) 94.24 (94.10, 94.39) 94.70 (94.30, 95.10)
LodgeConstruct –92.78 (–93.96, –91.60) –92.42 (–93.70, –91.14) –95.99 (–98.75, –93.24)
Transport+ 56.96 (47.08, 66.84) 57.51 (47.02, 67.99) 52.09 (22.66, 81.51)

a
WTP unit: Baht/time/person.

Table 5
Heterogeneity of average WTP with respect to factors of socio-economic characteristics, trip behavior, and recreation activity in Khao Yai National Park, Thailand.
Grouping criteria n WildCons– VisitContr+ VisitContr+ +
Transport+ ASC

a
WTP t score WTP t score WTP t score WTP t score WTP t score

Socio-economic characteristic
Male 374 –734.98 2.460⁎⁎ 56.78 –0.740 59.31 1.090 56.74 –0.048 –126.98 –0.902
Female 289 –754.27 59.19 54.18 57.24 –111.72
Single 340 –743.20 0.049 57.70 –0.084 55.72 –0.594 65.45 1.731 –137.32 –2.083⁎⁎
Married 323 –743.58 57.97 58.50 48.02 –102.45
Below undergraduate 167 –730.89 1.862 59.04 0.432 60.58 0.869 54.19 –0.288 –108.28 0.833
Undergraduate or higher degree 496 –747.60 57.42 55.90 57.89 –124.39
Income < 25,000 Baht (Thai) 310 –745.85 –0.590 57.11 –0.415 51.86 –2.094⁎⁎ 54.85 –0.392 –112.47 0.878
< 32,000 Baht (Foreigner)
Income ≥ 25,000 Baht (Thai) 353 –741.23 58.46 61.65 58.81 –127.24
≥32,000 Baht (Foreigner)
Domestic 593 –745.65 –1.691 56.62 –2.175⁎⁎ 55.27 –2.257⁎⁎ 56.87 –0.052 –116.55 1.312
Foreigner 70 –724.21 68.06 72.38 57.71 –152.35
No concern for the overcrowding problem 97 –729.87 1.237 43.60 –3.668 ⁎⁎⁎
36.42 –3.693 ⁎⁎⁎
39.28 –1.453 –48.89 3.080⁎⁎⁎
Concern for the overcrowding problem 566 –745.70 60.27 60.61 59.99 –132.57
Trip behavior
Day trip 328 –751.65 –2.105⁎⁎ 59.41 0.967 55.78 –0.547 62.73 1.133 –128.20 –0.929
Overnight trip 335 –735.30 56.28 58.34 51.31 –112.63
Recreation activity
Hiking 191 –741.46 –0.314 59.04 –0.473 66.11 –2.468⁎⁎ 51.80 0.651 –135.27 1.133
Camping 217 –729.71 –2.289⁎⁎ 56.40 0.616 55.63 0.430 51.54 0.749 –96.21 –1.873
Night safari 88 –740.51 –0.288 49.51 2.011⁎⁎ 44.70 2.011⁎⁎ 40.32 1.292 –86.29 –1.590
Nature education 151 –724.84 –2.370⁎⁎ 60.39 –0.858 56.73 0.081 64.83 –0.848 –162.32 2.861⁎⁎⁎
All respondents (average) 663 –743.39 57.83 57.08 56.96 –120.33

,
⁎⁎⁎ ⁎⁎
are significance differences at p < 0.001 and p < 0.05, respectively (the independent samples t-test).
a
WTP unit: Baht/time/person.

Table 5 shows the binary specific cases by using the independent
samples t-test to compare the difference of mean WTP between two
defined levels of respondents’ characteristics such as marital status,
higher and lower education levels, and attending recreation activities in
KYNP. At first glance, we see a large difference in valuation between the
respondents who are concerned about the overcrowding problem in
KYNP and those who are not concerned about it. The concerned people
have a stronger negative effect on the current situation or status quo.
Moreover, the expression of negative preferences on the current status
demonstrates a statistical difference between groups of tourists who are
unmarried or who join activities in nature education. The concerned
people also have a higher willingness to support regulating the tourist
influx at both levels. Conversely, the tourists who are unconcerned
often gave some reasons for their attitudes after being informed about
the situation of tourist overcrowding in KYNP (e.g. "I disagree with
controlling entry"; "It should not be a problem"; and "Everything is
okay"). Tourists who are foreigners, high-income earners, and those
who joined in hiking activities show a higher WTP for strict tourist
influx control, while those joining the night safari activity showed the
opposite results. Factors that affect the heterogeneity of negative feel-
ings toward a decline in the park's wildlife population are gender, time
spent in KYNP, and visitors' participation in camping and natural
education activities.
Table 6 presents group-specific results from the latent class analysis
revealed the existence of two latent classes. It shows that the re-
spondents’ gender, education level (Birola, Karousakisb & Koundouric,
2006), monthly income (Birola et al. 2006; Zong et al., 2017), nation-
ality (Juutinan et al., 2011), and time spent in the park (Juutinan et al.,
2011) are statistically significant variables in the class membership
combination. Latent class 1 is the largest one, making up 67.3% of the
sample and encompassing the tourists’ characteristics of foreign males
who are likely to have higher education and higher income and spend a
short time (such as one day) in KYNP. The other latent class, making up
32.7% of the sample, had characteristics diametrically opposite to the
first class, being made up of local women who are likely to have a lower
level education and lower income and spend a longer time (such as an
overnight trip) in KYNP.
The results of the latent class analysis show that the major seg-
mentation is statistically significant in almost all hypothetical attributes
except for ASC, VisitContr +, and InfoRegu, while the minority segment
is only significant for the WildCons– attribute and has a broader dis-
tribution in terms of the population. Our latent class results did not
allow us to compare the difference in WTP between the two groups
because of the non-significance of hypothetical price in class 2. The

121
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125

Table 6
Results of latent class model and WTP in Khao Yai National Park, Thailand.
Attributes and levels Class 1 (67.3%) Class 2 (32.7%)

a
Coeff. Std. error WTP Coeff. Std. error WTP

ASC –0.351 0.338 – –0.401 0.659 –

WildCons – –2.418⁎⁎⁎ 0.195 – –1.191⁎⁎⁎ 0.441 –
WildCons + 1.744⁎⁎⁎ 0.177 668.06 0.375 0.658 –
VisitContr + 0.197 0.123 – –0.137 0.261 –
VisitContr + + 0.249⁎ 0.133 95.47 0.194 0.219 –
InfoKnow –0.380⁎⁎ 0.187 – 0.647 0.472 –
InfoRegu 0.112 0.161 – –0.206 0.341 –
InfoKnow&Regu 0.417⁎⁎ 0.180 159.65 –0.324 0.458 –
LodgeMaintain 0.418⁎⁎⁎ 0.117 160.00 0.205 0.176 –
LodgeConstruct –0.595⁎⁎⁎ 0.173 – 0.240 0.312 –
Transport+ 0.329⁎⁎⁎ 0.110 126.10 0.092 0.146 –
Payment –0.003⁎⁎ 0.001 - –0.036 0.024 –
Class characteristics: class 1
Constant 0.288 0.962
Female –0.648⁎ 0.364
Higher education; Undergraduate or over 0.998⁎ 0.536
Higher monthly income; Thai > 25,000 Baht, Foreigner > 32,000 Baht 0.768⁎⁎ 0.340
Foreigner 2.434⁎⁎ 1.228
Longer time spent; Overnight trip –1.194⁎⁎⁎ 0.443
Model properties
Chi squared 1190.334
Log-likelihood –1604.641
McFadden Pseudo R2 0.275
Choice sets 1971
Parameters 30

Note⁎⁎⁎, ⁎⁎, ⁎ are significance difference at p < 0.001, p < 0.05, and p < 0.1, respectively.
a
WTP unit: Baht/time/person.

population in the first class has a tendency for a higher negative re-
sponse to a decrease in wildlife population compared to the second
group, as well as higher WTP in any positive preference attributes
compared to the average WTP, as shown in Table 4. Respondents in
class 1 are willing to support increasing wildlife conservation (668.06
Baht/time/person), intensively controlling the tourist influx during the
peak season (95.47 Baht/time/person), providing more ecological
knowledge and information about national park regulations (159.65
Baht/time/person), providing good lodging services (160 Baht/time/
person), and initiating the public transport service (126.10 Baht/time/
person). Thus, these segmentation results can identify groups of tourists
for a potential tourism development program in KYNP.
Baht/time/person), followed by scenario II (152.12 Baht/time/person)
and scenario III (75.62 Baht/time/person), respectively. The highest
preference program combines increasing wildlife conservation and
moderate reduction of the tourist influx during the peak season. The
facilities development program has the widest range of support, with
this result possibly caused by tourists being hesitant in terms of their
confidence in the design of the public transportation system or their
being wary of the limitations and discomfort of traveling by public
vehicles. These hypothetical scenarios could be a guide for better future
ecotourism operations in KYNP.
4. Discussion

3.4. Welfare estimation for the scenarios of national park management
In light of the budget constraints and limitations on development
planning (Panusittikorn & Prato, 2001), we design four hypothetical
scenarios as guidelines for the future management program of KYNP
(Table 7). These attribute programs are chosen due to having positive
and higher levels of preference in the RPL. The results of the average
WTP inform us that scenario I is the most preferred by tourists (534.44
The task of a national park like KYNP is to combine the aims of
nature conservation, environmental education, and provision of re-
creational experience while simultaneously satisfying tourists' needs
with the goal of sustainable development. However, exploring paths to
effectively integrate multiple perspectives into a cohesive strategy that
will ensure sustainability in national parks is the principal issue for the
management of environmental resource and park sectors. The main
contribution of this study is the design and testing of a research

Table 7
Hypothetical policies for Khao Yai National Park, Thailand.
Attribute Hypothetical scenarios

Scenario I: Conservation and Scenario II: Crowding reduction and Scenario III: Tourism facilities Scenario IV: Integrated
crowding reduction good lodging service development ecotourism development

Wildlife conservation
Tourist number control
Lodging service
Public transport system
Average of WTP (Baht/time/
person)a
(95% confidence interval)
Increase conservation Maintain status quo Maintain status quo Increase conservation
Medium control Medium control Less control Medium control
Stay the present Good maintenance Good maintenance Good maintenance
No operation No operation Operating Operating
534.44 152.12 75.62 685.69
(516.99 – 534.44) (137.95 – 166.29) (39.29 – 263.20) (556.27 – 815.10)

a
1 US Dollar = 35.88 Thai Baht (฿)based on average monthly exchange rate during September 2015 to February 2016 (Bank of Thailand, 2016).

122
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee
framework which contains the various elements germane to sustainable
development in a national park and generates key information about
the social welfare values attaching to multiple attributes for national
park management, as expressed through tourists' preferences based on
various park management scenarios. Besides the contribution to a na-
tional park management, our research framework also a base for the
theoretical model for sustainable development in a national park. This
study uses the CE method to analyze tourist preferences regarding a
number of attributes specifically chosen with a view to designing ef-
fective strategies for the development of facilities in KYNP, Thailand.
We specifically focus on the social welfare valuation of critical attri-
butes of national park management: wildlife conservation, control of
tourist numbers, information provision, lodging service, and public
transport system. This study uses the RPL model to estimate the tourists'
MWTP values for multiple attributes. We test the heterogeneity of the
tourists' preferences regarding the attributes of national park manage-
ment with the LCM model, and then estimate the economic values
under different national park scenarios aimed at sustainable develop-
ment.
Our main results indicate that tourists would support an ecotourism
development program in the KYNP. We found that the alteration to the
wildlife population is the feature that is of most concern to the re-
spondents, a result consistent with those of Juutinen et al. (2011). The
result is also supported by Deng et al. (2002), who found that tourists
usually anticipate a completely beautiful and appealing environment in
nature-based tourism. Besides improving its wildlife conservation op-
erations, KYNP also ought to develop an interpretation program and
create a local guide registration system to enhance the quality of
wildlife tourism (Khowinthawong & Emphandhu, 2016). Low-quality
ecotourism is reflected by the responses signs of the tourists who take
part in the night safari tourism, nature education, and camping, for
which the WTP values are slightly lower than the average values as-
sociated with the attributes of wildlife conservation and tourist influx
control. The next important issue is to regulate the influx of tourists,
and how to implement appropriate controls. Our RPL results point to
tourists agreeing with the idea of influx control during the high season
and having the opinion that the total number of tourists should not
exceed 10,000-15,000 per day. Obviously, foreign tourists have a
higher preference for decreasing the congestion by limiting tourist
numbers than local tourists do, a finding supported by Hearne & Salinas
(2002). As a result of overcrowding, most foreigners choose to visit
KYNP during weekdays and avoid some extra-long weekends, while the
local tourists tend to do the opposite. Because of these different habits,
park managers may encounter difficulty in developing a policy for
congestion control that is suitable for these two groups of tourists.
However, our RPL results support that raising awareness of the over-
crowding issue is an important component for the implementation of
congestion control.
What are the possibilities for developing the recreational facilities of
the park? The non-significance of the information provision attribute
may reflect that most tourists do not attach much significance to an
increasing number of interpretation and regulation boards provided by
the national park, but might focus instead on the quality of what is
provided, such as inclusion of English language descriptions
(Mahdayani, 2011) and relying on more attractive designs that are in
harmony with nature. Improving the quality of accommodation services
enjoys a high level of preference among tourists, while the expansion of
lodging zones by opening up forest areas gives rise to tourist perception
that welfare would be diminished. This leads us to suggest that ex-
panding the lodging capacity without affecting the environment should
be a priority consideration. The concept of the public transport in-
itiative inside the park received a favorable response from the tourists.
This concept measure aims to improve the quality of tourism and re-
duce the impact of traffic in KYNP. To become a successful transpor-
tation system, designing routes and schedule that meet the needs of
123
Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125
tourists and careful study in the form of a cost-effectiveness analysis are
important steps that must be precursors to beginning operations. Thus,
the future potential management of recreational facility development in
KYNP should take into account such issues as maintaining the standard
of the lodging service and initiating a public transport system.
Based on the LCM results, we found heterogeneity between two
segmented groups of tourists regarding ecotourism development in
KYNP. Demographic characteristics and trip behaviors that are asso-
ciated with higher preferences and WTP among these tourists are being
male, having higher education, earning higher monthly incomes, being
foreigners, and spending shorter amounts of time in the park. This re-
sult is similar to previous latent class analysis results from Juutinen
et al. (2011), who found that foreigners who have a higher income but
spend longer in the park have consistently higher preferences for sup-
porting multiple developments in Oulanka National Park. Similarly,
results of León et al. (2015) support that tourists who have more years
of education and higher incomes would have greater WTP for natural
conservation and community development in the National Park of Ro-
sario and San Bernardo.
Finally, we have built up four guide scenarios from the positive-
preference attributes to serve as aids for decision making, taking into
account the limited development budget, and compared them with the
base-scenario. The preferred choice is the conservation and crowding
reduction scenario, followed by the crowding reduction and good lod-
ging service scenario, and the tourism facilities development scenario,
respectively.
5. Management implication of the results and recommendations
Based on the information of the discussion, this research leads us to
the following policy and management implication for the park man-
agers: (1) A management plan should contain wildlife conservation,
tourist number control, information provision, lodging service, a public
transport system, and a financial element for the sustainable develop-
ment of a national park, and this conceptual framework is supported by
our empirical results; (2) Integrating the aforementioned multiple as-
pects into national park management would be a solution for the pro-
blem of meeting sustainability goals in a national park (Guimarães
et al., 2014; Juutinen et al., 2011; León et al., 2015); (3) Understanding
the preference heterogeneity of different stakeholders through an in-
tegrated framework using qualitative and quantitative data can assist in
establishing a comprehensive framework of management strategy for a
national park (Hanley et al., 2001; Hearne & Santos, 2005; Lee & Wang
et al., 2017); (4) For appropriate market segmentation and positioning
of a national park, managers should focus on increased wildlife con-
servation, controlling the number of tourists during high season at
every level, ensuring adequate maintenance of the lodging services,
increasing the amount of information about ecological knowledge and
park regulations, and initiating a public transport service. Doing so
would enhance the attractiveness of programs to future tourists by
being in line with their preferences and would also meet the goal of
sustainable development of that national park simultaneously; and (5)
A comprehensive and detailed analysis of their different characteristics
and tourists' preferences reveals heterogeneity of tastes regarding eco-
tourism and recreational facility development in the national park. The
park managers and DNP could consider a mode of management that
balances between recreation resource services and natural conservation
based on these significant results.
Funders
Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan
Grant/Award Number: MOST-106-2410-H-259-048-, MOST-105-
2410-H-259-059-
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2018.08.007.
Appendix A. Large mammal species in Khao Yai National Park, Thailand
Common name Scientific name
Asiatic Black Bear Ursus thibetanus
Asian Elephant Elephas maximus
Barking Deer Muntiacus muntjak
Dhole Cuon alpinus
Gaur Bos gaurus
Malayan Sun Bear Helarctos malayanus
Sambar Deer Cervus unicolor
Sumatran Serow Capricornis sumatraensis
Tiger Panthera tigris
Wild Boar Sus scrofa
Integrating multiple attributes for sustainable development in a national park.
a
Kanchanasaka et al. (2010).
b
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, 2015).
References
Alpízar, F., Carlsson, F., & Martinsson, P. (2001). Using choice experiments for non-
market valuation. Economic Issues, 8(1), 83–110.
Arsić, S., Nikolić, D., & Živković, Z. (2017). Hybrid SWOT - ANP - FANP model for
prioritization strategies of sustainable development of ecotourism in National Park
Djerdap, Serbia. Forest Policy and Economics, 80, 11–26.
Badman, T., & Bomhard, B. (2008). World Heritage and protected areas. Gland: IUCN.
Balmford, A., Beresford, J., Green, J., Naidoo, R., Walpole, M., & Manica, A. (2009). A
global perspective on trends in nature-based tourism. PLoS Biology, 7(6), e1000144.
Bank of Thailand (2016). Foreign exchange rates. Retrieved September 15, 2016, from
Bank of Thailand Web site: https://www.bot.or.th/english/statistics/_layouts/
application/exchangerate/exchangerate.aspx.
Barala, N., Sternb, M. J., & Bhattarai, R. (2008). Contingent valuation of ecotourism in
Annapurna conservation area, Nepal: Implications for sustainable park finance and
local development. Ecological Economics, 66, 218–227.
Bennett, J., & Blamey, R. (2001). The choice modeling approach to environmental valuation.
Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.
Birola, E., Karousakisb, K., & Koundouric, P. (2006). Using a choice experiment to ac-
count for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes: The case of Cheimaditida
wetland in Greece. Ecological Economics, 60, 145–156.
Chaminuka, P., Groeneveld, R. A., Selomane, A. O., & van Ierland, E. C. (2012). Tourist
preferences for ecotourism in rural communities adjacent to Kruger National Park: A
choice experiment approach. Tourism Management, 33(1), 168–176.
Deng, J., King, B., & Bauer, T. (2002). Evaluating natural attractions for tourism. Annals of
Tourism Research, 29(2), 422–438.
Deng, J., Qiang, S., Walker, G. J., & Zheng, Y. (2003). Assessment on and perception of
visitors' environmental impacts of nature tourism: A case study of Zhangjiajie
National Forest Park, China. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11(6), 529–548.
DNP (2016a). Statistical data 2015. Bangkok. Retrieved October 5, 2016, from
Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation. Web site: http://
www.dnp.go.th/statistics/2558/stat2558.asp.
DNP (2016b). Database of visitors and vehicles in national parks. Retrieved March 17, 2016,
from Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation, National Park
Office. Web site: http://park.dnp.go.th/visitor/indexstatistics.php [in Thai] .
Fennel, D. A., & Nowaczek, P. (2010). Moral and empirical dimensions of human/animal
interactions in ecotourism: deepening an otherwise shallow pool of debate. Journal of
Ecotourism, 9(3), 239–255.
García-Llorente, M., Martín-López, B., Nunes, P. A. L. D., Castro, A. J., & Montes, C.
(2012). A choice experiment study for land-use scenarios in semi-arid watershed
environments. Journal of Arid Environment, 87, 219–230.
Gössling, S. (1999). Ecotourism: A means to safeguard biodiversity and ecosystem func-
tions? Ecological Economics, 29, 303–320.
Guimarães, M. H., Madureira, L., Nunes, L. C., Santos, J. L., Sousa, C., Boski, T., &
Dentinho, T. (2014). Using choice modeling to estimate the effects of environmental
improvements on local development: When the purpose modifies the tool. Ecological
Economics, 108, 79–90.
Haab, T. C., & McConnell, K. E. (2002). Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources: The
Econometrics of Non-market Valuation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Haegeli, P., & Pröbstl-Haider, U. (2016). Research on personal risk in outdoor recreation
and nature-based tourism. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 13, 1–9.
Hanley, N., Wright, R. E., & Adamowicz, V. (1998). Using choice experiments to value the
environment: Design issues, current experience and future prospects. Environmental
124
Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125
Abundance (%)a Conservation statusb
4.0 Vulnerable
28.4 Endangered
12.6 Least Concern
6.3 Endangered
28.4 Vulnerable
1.3 Vulnerable
10.1 Vulnerable
2.0 Vulnerable
0.5 Endangered
21.9 Least Concern
and Resource Economics, 11(3-4), 413–428.
Hanley, N., Wright, R. E., & Koop, G. (2002). Modelling recreation demand using choice
experiments: Climbing in Scotland. Environmental and Resource Economics, 22,
449–466.
Hearne, R. R., & Salinas, Z. M. (2002). The use of choice experiments in the analysis of
tourist preferences for ecotourism development in Costa Rica. Journal of
Environmental Management, 65, 153–163.
Hearne, R. R., & Santos, C. A. (2005). Tourists’ and locals’ preferences toward ecotourism
development in the Maya Biosphere Reserve, Guatemala. Environment, Development
and Sustainability, 7(3), 303–318.
Höffken, P. (2010). New issues in old forests: Recent approaches to conserve Thailand’s major
protected areas. 33, Pacific News20–23.
IUCN (2015). The IUCN red list of threatened species. Retrieved April 16, 2016, from
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. Web site:
http://www.iucnredlist.org/.
Jones, M., Alexander, C., Widmar, N. O., Ricker-Gilbert, J., & Lowenberg-DeBoer, J. M.
(2016). Do insect and mold damage affect maize prices in Africa? Evidence from
Malawi. Modern Economy, 7(11), 1168–1185.
Juutinen, A., Mitani, Y., Mäntymaa, E., Shoji, Y., Siikamaki, P., & Svento, R. (2011).
Combining ecological and recreational aspects in national park management: A
choice experiment application. Ecological Economics, 70(6), 1231–1239.
Kaczan, D., Swallow, B. M., & Adamowicz, W. L. (2013). Designing a payments for eco-
system services (PES) program to reduce deforestation in Tanzania: An assessment of
payment approaches. Ecological Economics, 95, 20–30.
Kanchanasaka, B., Thunhikorn, S., Vinitpornsawan, S., Prayoon, U., & Faengbubpha, K.
(2010). Status of large mammals in Thailand. Bangkok: Wildlife Research Division,
Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation [In Thai].
Khai, H. V., & Yabe, M. (2015). Consumer preferences for agricultural products con-
sidering the value of biodiversity conservation in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Journal
for Nature Conservation, 25, 62–71.
Khowinthawong, C., & Emphandhu, D. (2016). Indicator development for evaluating
wildlife tourism management in Thai national parks. Thai Journal of Forestry, 35(3),
100–110.
Laengcharoen, P. (2014). Assessment of financial and fiscal management pattern in protected
area: Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai World Heritage Site. Bangkok: Enhancing the Economics
of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Thailand/Southeast Asia [in Thai].
Lee, C. K., & Han, S. Y. (2002). Estimating the use and preservation values of national
parks' tourism resources using a contingent valuation method. Tourism Management,
23, 531–540.
Lee, C. K., Lee, J. H., Kim, T. K., & Mjelde, J. W. (2010). Preferences and willingness to
pay for bird-watching tour and interpretive services using a choice experiment.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(5), 695–708.
Lee, C. H., & Wang, C. H. (2017). Estimating residents’ preferences of the land use pro-
gram surrounding forest park, Taiwan. Sustainability, 9, 1–19.
León, C. J., de León, J., Araña, J. E., & González, M. M. (2015). Tourists' preferences for
congestion, residents' welfare and the ecosystems in a national park. Ecological
Economics, 118, 21–29.
Lertwannawit, A., & Anuwichanont, J. (2011). Tourists’ expectation and perception to-
wards environmental issue management for green tourism of Khao Yai National Park.
International Business & Economics Research Journal, 10(9), 41–46.
Louviere, J. J., Hensher, D. A., & Swait, J. D. (2000). Stated choice methods: Analysis and
application. Cambridge: University Press.
Mahdayani, W. (2011). Visitor management for ecotourism development at world heritage site:
case study of Khao Yai national park, Thailand. Jakarta: DESMA Center.
S. Sriarkarin, C.-H. Lee
McFadden, D. (1973). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In P.
Zarembka (Ed.). Frontiers in econometrics (pp. 105–142). New York: Academic Press.
McFadden, D. (1978). Chapter 13: Quantitative methods for analysing travel behavior of
individuals: some recent developments. In D. A. Hensher, & P. R. Stopher (Eds.).
Behavior travel modeling (pp. 279–318). London: Croom Helm.
Mitchell, R. C., & Casson, R. T. (1989). Using surveys to value public goods: The contingent
valuation method. Washington DC: Resources for the Future Press.
Newman, P., Manning, R., Dennis, D., & McKonly, W. (2005). Informing carrying capacity
decision making in Yosemite National Park, USA using stated choice modeling.
Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 23(1), 75–89.
Orams, M. B. (2002). Feeding wildlife as a tourism attraction: A review of issues and
impacts. Tourism Management, 23, 281–293.
Panusittikorn, P., & Prato, T. (2001). Conservation of protected areas in Thailand: The
case of Khao Yai National Park. The George Wright FORUM, 18(2), 66–76.
Phumsathan, S. (2013). Environmental value orientation and environmental impact
perception of visitors to Khao Yai National Park. Kasetsart Journal (Social Science), 34,
534–542.
Reihanian, A., Mahmood, N. Z. B., Kahrom, E., & Hin, T. W. (2012). Sustainable tourism
development strategy by SWOT analysis: Boujagh National Park, Iran. Tourism
Management Perspectives, 4, 223–228.
Rolfe, J., Bennett, J., & Louviere, J. (2002). Stated values and reminders of substitute
goods: testing for framimg effects with choice modelling. The Australien Journal of
Agricultural and Resource Economics, 46(1), 1–20.
Royal Thai Government (2004). Submission for nomination of the Dong Payayen – Khao Yai
Forest Complex to be included in the World Heritage list. Paris: UNESCO World Heritage
Centre.
Saminpanya, S., Wisarttavisit, P., & Chumnankid, C. (2009). Development of manage-
ment guidelines from tourist and stakeholder consultations: The case of
Dongphayayen-Khao Yai Forest Complex, Thailand. Managing Leisure, 14(3),
210–233.
Shoji, Y., & Tsuge, T. (2015). Heterogeneous preferences for winter nature-based tours in
sub-frigid climate zones: A latent class approach. Tourism Economics, 21(2), 387–407.
Sunlu, U. (2003). Environmental impacts of tourism. In D. Camarda, & L. Grassini (Eds.).
Local Resources and Global Trades: Environments and Agriculture in the Mediterranean
Region (pp. 263–270). Bari: CIHEAM.
Swait, J., & Louviere, J. (1993). The role of the scale parameter in the estimation and
comparison of multinomial logit models. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(3),
305–314.
Train, K. E. (1998). Recreation demand models with taste differences over people. Land
Econommics, 74(2), 1–23.
Train, K. E. (2003). Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: University Press.
Tran, D. T. T., Nomura, H., & Yabe, M. (2015). Tourists’ preferences toward ecotourism
development and sustainable biodiversity conservation in protected areas of Vietnam
- The case of Phu My Protected Area. Journal of Agricultural Science, 7(8), 81–89.
Tyrvaynen, T., & Vaanenen, H. (1998). The economic value of urban forest amenities: An
application of the contingent valuation method. Landscape and Urban Planning, 43,
105–118.
Vojáček, O., & Pecáková, I. (2010). Comparison of discrete choice models for economic
environmental research. Prague Economic Papers, (1), 35–53.
125
Tourism Management Perspectives 28 (2018) 113–125
White, D. D. (2007). An interpretive study of Yosemite National Park visitors' perspectives
toward alternative transportation in Yosemite Valley. Environmental Management, 39,
50–62.
Whittaker, D., Shelby, B., Meldrum, B., DeGroot, H., & Bacon, J. (2012). Transportation,
recreation, and capacities in Yosemite National Park. The George Wright Forum, 29(3),
338–350.
World Heritage Committee (2005). Decision: 29 COM 8B.11 Nominations of Natural
Properties to the World Heritage List (Dong Phayayen-Khao Yai Forest Complex). Paris:
UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
Xu, F., & Fox, D. (2014). Modelling attitudes to nature, tourism and sustainable devel-
opment in national parks: A survey of visitors in China and the UK. Tourism
Management, 45, 142–158.
Zong, C., Cheng, K., Lee, C. H., & Hsu, N. L. (2017). Capturing tourists' preferences for the
management of community-based ecotourism in a forest park. Sustainability, 9(9),
1–16.
Mr. Supasit is a Ph. D. student in Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Studies, College of
Environmental Studies, National Dong Hwa University. He
focused on the evaluation of non-market goods and
Ecotourism.
Chun-Hung, Lee Professor Lee worked in the department
of natural resources and environmental studies, National
Dong-Hwa University, Taiwan, and focused on the eco-
nomics evaluation for the ecotourism and ecosystem ser-
vices based on the methodology of ecological economics.
He published 5 SSCI journal articles (Such as Sustainability,
Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, China
Agricultural Review, and Tourism Management
Perspectives), 1 Econlit, 17 TSSCI journal articles, and
joined over 37 international conferences. By the way, he
got 17 Ministry of Science and Technology Projects, and 18
research projects from government in Taiwan. In the nearly
future, he will extend the above topics to environmental
valuation and sustainability & change, and have a chance to
apply the methodology of ecological economics in Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, Hong
Kong, China, Nepal, and USA.