Searchable Databases of Greenway/Trail Economic Impact Studies:

Online searchable databases

• Headwaters Economics – 105 studies on the impacts of trails in a single library, searchable by type of benefit, use, year, and region.
• National Recreational Trails Database – The online database contains information on 1256National Recreation Trails in all 50 states. Trail data is as provided by the trail manager.

New England/Connecticut Studies:

• Brodnitzki, W. (1994). An economic evaluation of a proposed greenway using a contingent valuation method in a benefit/cost framework : a case study of the lower Housatonic Riverbelt. Thesis. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut.
• Carstensen, F. V., Clapp, J., Cooke, T., McMillen, S., & Li, N. (1998). Waterbury and Naugatuck Revaluation Study. University of Connecticut, Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis.
• Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency. (2013). User survey of the Farmington River Trail.
• Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency. (2009). Southington-Plainville Farmington Canal Greenway Study.
• Farmington Valley Trails Council. (2013). Farmington Valley Trail usage study.
• Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Agency. (2008). Greater Bridgeport Housatonic River Greenway Project Draft Pathways and Study Plan.
• Gunther, P., Parr, K. E., Graziano, M., & Carstensen, F. V. (2011). The Economic Impact of State Parks, Forests and Natural Resources under the Management of (Connecticut) Department of Environmental Protection. Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis (CCEA) University of Connecticut.
• Zhang, C., Jennings, L., & L. Aultman-Hall. (2010). Estimating tourism expenditures for the Burlington Waterfront Path and the Island Line Trail. UVM Transportation Research Center.

Nationwide Studies (selected):

• Alta Econsult Solutions. (2013). Silver Comet Trail Economic Impact Analysis and Planning Study.
• Bowker, J. M., Bergstrom, J. C., & Gill, J. (2007). Estimating the economic value and impacts of recreational trails: a case study of the Virginia Creeper Rail Trail. Tourism Economics,13(2), 241–260.
• Bowker, J. M., Bergstrom, J. C., & Gill, J. K. (2004). The Virginia Creeper Trail.pdf: an assessment of user demographics, preferences, and economics. Virginia Department of Conservation.
• Bunting, D. & Briand, G. (2003). Impact of trails and greenways in Spokane’s Great River Gorge. Eastern Washington State University Institute for Public Policy and Economic Analysis.
• Cox, S., et al. (2011). Building connectivity through recreation trails: A closer look at New River State Park and the Virginia Creeper Trail. Virginia Tech Economic Development Studio.
• The Impacts of Central Ohio Trails. Final Report, June 2015.
• Trail Facts. (2005). NCR Trail 2004 User Study and Economic Impact Analysis.

Property Valuation:

The question of how greenways and multi-use trails effect adjacent property values has not been conclusively answered. Real estate and trails professionals take a different view than economists, who see increases in property values as a redistribution of wealth offset by decreases elsewhere. There is also a subjective component to consider, as not all homeowners consider a trail to be an asset.

• Lindsey, G., Man, J., Payton, S. & K. Dickson. (2004). Property values, recreation values, and urban greenways. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. 22 (3). 69-90.
• National Association of Realtors – Articles on the effects of greenways and multi-use trails on adjacent property values.
• Nicholls, S., Crompton, J. L., & others. (2005). The impact of greenways on property values: Evidence from Austin, Texas. Journal of Leisure Research, 37(3), 321.
• Phaneuf, D.J., Smith, V.K., Palmquist, R.B., & Pope, J.C. (2008). Integrating property value and local recreation models to value ecosystem services in urban watersheds. Land Economics, 84(3), 361-381.
• Racca, D. & Dhanju, A. (2006). Property value/desirability effects of bike paths adjacent to residential areas. The State of Delaware Department of Transportation.

Willingness-to-pay:

Willingness-to-pay refers to the amount that an individual is willing to pay to use a non-market good such as a trail or greenway. Willingness-to-pay is an important variable in benefit-cost analysis as well as in determining consumer surplus, or net willingness-to-pay, which is the amount an individual is willing to pay minus the actual cost of use. If this surplus is spent locally, it can be considered an economic effect due to the trail or greenway.

• Betz, C., Bergstrom, J. & J. Bowker. (2003). A contingent trip model for estimating rail-trail demand. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 46(l). 79-96.
• Brander, L. M., & Koetse, M. J. (2011). The value of urban open space: Meta-analyses of contingent valuation and hedonic pricing results. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(10), 2763–2773.
• Brodnitzki, W. (1994). An economic evaluation of a proposed greenway using a contingent valuation method in a benefit/cost framework : a case study of the lower Housatonic Riverbelt. Thesis. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut.
• Doran, R., Hanss, D., & Larsen, S. (2015). Attitudes, efficacy beliefs, and willingness to pay for environmental protection when travelling. Tourism and Hospitality Research.
• Dumas, C., Herstine, J. & Whitehead, J. (2011). Joint estimation of revealed and stated preference trip and willingness-to-pay data to estimate the benefits and impacts of an Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway dredging and maintenance program. In J. Whitehead, T. Haab & J. Huang (Ed.), Preference data for environmental valuation: Combining Revealed and Stated Approaches. London, UK: Routledge.
• Smith, V. K. (1997). Pricing What is Priceless: A Status Report on Non-Market Valuation of Environmental Resources.

Public Health Impacts of Trails:

This is a topic overlooked in many economic impact analyses of multi-use trails and greenways. The health benefits due to increased physical activity are considerable, but comparatively little literature exists examining the relationship between the two in regard to trail usage.

• National Trails Training Partnership – Nationwide database of articles on the health impacts of multi-use trails and greenways.
• Price, A. E., Reed, J. A., & Muthukrishnan, S. (2012). Trail user demographics, physical activity behaviors, and perceptions of a newly constructed greenway trail. Journal of Community Health, 37(5), 949–956.

Resources for Trail Data Collection:

Surveys remain the principal method of data collection regarding trail use. The following resources can help in designing and implementing a trail user survey.

• National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project– Nationwide effort that provides a consistent model of data collection and ongoing data for use by planners, governments, and bicycle and pedestrian professionals.
• Rails to Trails Conservancy Trail User Survey Workbook – Trails organization’s methodology for development and implementation of trail user surveys.
• Ryus, P. (2014). Guidebook on pedestrian and bicycle volume data collection. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board of the National Academies.
• Sun, Y.-Y., Wong, K.-F., & Lai, H.-C. (2010). Statistical properties and survey design of visitor spending using segmentation. Tourism Economics,16(4), 807–832.
• Troped, P. J., Whitcomb, H. A., Hutto, B., Reed, J. A., & Hooker, S. P. (2009). Reliability of a brief intercept survey for trail use behaviors. Journal of Physical Activity & Health, 6(6), 775–780.

Economic Background Literature:

The following documents are helpful in defining the terms and concepts examined in most economic impact studies:

• Morgan, J. (2010). Analyzing the benefits and costs of economic development projects. University of North Carolina School of Government. Community and Economic Development Bulletin. 7. 1-16.
• Nadel, R. (2005). Economic impacts of parks, rivers, trails and greenways. University of Michigan.
• Queensland Government. (2012). Overview of some alternative methodologies for economic impact analysis. Queensland Treasury.
• United States Department of Interior, National Park Service (1995). Economic impacts of protecting rivers, trails, and greenway corridors. Rails, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program.
• Weisbrod, G. & Weisbrod, B. (1997). Measuring economic impacts of projects and programs. Economic Development Research Group. Boston, MA: EDRG.

Downtowns and Trails Resources

• Budris, A., Walsh, J., & Brown, L. Downtown Trails as Community & Economic Development Engines. Presentation for The BRIDGE Series, Connecticut Main Street Center, November 16, 2018.
• Slides Trails as Economic Engines for a Downtown 11-25-18