Landscape and Urban Planning 93 (2009) 83–91 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Landscape and Urban Planning journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landurbplan The value of public rights of way: A choice experiment in Bedfordshire, England Joe Morris a , Sergio Colombo b , Andrew Angus a,∗ , Kitty Stacey a , David Parsons a , Martyn Brawn c , Nick Hanley d a Building 42a, School of Applied Sciences, Cranfield University, Bedford MK43 0AL, UK b Department of Agricultural Economics, Instituto Andaluz de Investigación Agraria (IFAPA), Andalucía Government, Camino de Purchil s/n, 18004 Granada, Spain c Bedfordshire County Council, County Hall, Cauldwell Street, Bedford MK42 9AP, UK d 4B44 Cottrell Building, Department of Economics, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, UK article info Article history: Received 5 June 2008 Received in revised form 3 March 2009 Accepted 9 June 2009 Available online 14 July 2009 Keywords: Choice experiments Public access Willingness to pay abstract Public rights of way (PROW) in England provide a range of social and economic benefits by allowing people to follow prescribed routes across land belonging to others. In urban areas they provide networks of mobility and interaction, helping to reduce reliance on motorised transport. In the rural context they define access to the countryside, critically linked to recreation and tourism, as well as providing mobility networks for local residents. In England, as in many other countries, local government authorities (LGAs) have statutory responsi- bility for maintaining PROW, committing considerable taxpayer funds for this purpose. LGAs are under increasing pressure, however, to demonstrate that funds committed to PROW give good value for money in terms of the outcomes obtained. In this context, this study set out to determine preferences and willingness to pay for different standards of provision of PROW. The choice experiment technique was used in a face-to-face survey of 327 citizens in the Bedfordshire LGA area, England. Analysis confirmed the importance of PROW attributes such as physical surface conditions, signage and connectivity, with the importance of these varying amongst different users. Implicit prices were derived that showed willingness to pay by households through local taxation for marginal improvements in each attribute. The majority of respondents, however, showed a strong preference for the maintenance of current standards of provision and fiscal charges. The approach has potential general application, enabling estimates of PROW for other regions, helping to justify and prioritise expenditure and operational activities on this important public good. © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Public rights of way (PROW) in England and Wales, provide a wide range of social and economic benefits to those other than owners of land. PROW are a key element of the institutional frame- work that secure public entitlements to follow prescribed routes for the purpose of access, movement, communications, exchange and connectivity. The protection and extension of PROW such as footpaths, bridle- ways, restricted byways and byways open to all traffic are also an important way of encouraging people to engage in informal enjoy- ment of urban and rural areas, with beneficial consequences for health and welfare. In urban areas they provide networks of mobil- ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 01234 752983. E-mail addresses: j.morris@cranfield.ac.uk (J. Morris), scolombo@ugr.es (S. Colombo), a.angus@cranfield.ac.uk (A. Angus), k.stacey@cranfield.ac.uk (K. Stacey), d.parsons@cranfield.ac.uk (D. Parsons), martyn.brawn@bedscc.gov.uk (M. Brawn), n.d.hanley@stir.ac.uk (N. Hanley). ity and interaction for people at the community level, helping to reduce reliance on motorised transport. In the rural context they define access to the countryside, critically linked to recreation and tourism, as well as providing mobility networks for local residents. Many PROW networks can be classified as so-called ‘greenways’, defined as ‘linear corridors of protected green space’ (Fábos and Ryan, 2006). In a special edition of this journal, Fábos and Ryan (2006) reviewed the international experience of greenways, con- firming that that they operate at different local, metropolitan and regional scales and typically serve multiple purposes, including mobility, recreation and ecology. It is the ‘connectivity’ of green- ways, for people as well as ecological processes, which distinguishes them from other forms of green infrastructure, such as parks or nature conservation sites (Walmsley, 2006). The potential multi- ple benefits of greenways, often facilitated by public rights of way, requires that they are fully integrated into landscape and develop- ment planning (Turner, 2006). From a user perspective, the design and maintenance of greenways must be attuned to local needs if they are to add-value at the neighbourhood level (Lindsey, 1999; Conine et al., 2004). 0169-2046/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.06.007