IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v10y1997i2p189-205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards More Efficient Compensation Programmes for Tourists' Benefits From Agriculture in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Franz Hackl
  • Gerald Pruckner

Abstract

This paper covers nonmarket services provided by farmers for recreational purposes in several Central European regions. A regionally specified general equilibrium model is used to derive the efficiency conditions for a competitive equilibrium to guarantee a Pareto optimal outcome. Moreover, we present green agricultural compensation programmes in Europe and their assessment from an economic perspective. The empirical analysis focuses on tourists' willingness to pay (WTP) for the provision of agricultural landscape-enhancing services in Austria. A comparison of these measures with current voluntary compensation payments made to farmers for the preservation of an agricultural countryside in several Austrian tourism communities suggests that the hypothetical contingent valuation (CV) results represent a valid order of magnitude for the value of recreation-related agricultural services. As far as agricultural policy is concerned, environmental improvement, the stabilization of agricultural income levels, diminishing intrasectoral income differences, and the development of economically disadvantaged rural regions can be expected from directly subsidizing farmers for the provision of countryside amenities. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Suggested Citation

  • Franz Hackl & Gerald Pruckner, 1997. "Towards More Efficient Compensation Programmes for Tourists' Benefits From Agriculture in Europe," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 189-205, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:10:y:1997:i:2:p:189-205
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1026480123406
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1026480123406
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1026480123406?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kalle Seip & Jon Strand, 1992. "Willingness to pay for environmental goods in Norway: A contingent valuation study with real payment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 91-106, January.
    2. Pruckner, Gerald J, 1995. "Agricultural Landscape Cultivation in Austria: An Application of the CVM," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 22(2), pages 173-190.
    3. Helen R. Neill & Ronald G. Cummings & Philip T. Ganderton & Glenn W. Harrison & Thomas McGuckin, 1994. "Hypothetical Surveys and Real Economic Commitments," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(2), pages 145-154.
    4. Drake, Lars, 1992. "The Non-market Value of the Swedish Agricultural Landscape," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 19(3), pages 351-364.
    5. Cummings, Ronald G & Harrison, Glenn W & Rutstrom, E Elisabet, 1995. "Homegrown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous Choice Approach Incentive-Compatible?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 260-266, March.
    6. Hanemann, W., 1994. "Contingent Valuation and Economics," CUDARE Working Papers 198636, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    7. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249.
    8. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    9. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peterson, Jeffrey M. & Boisvert, Richard N. & de Gorter, Harry, 1999. "Multifunctionality and Optimal Environmental Policies for Agriculture in an Open Economy," Working Papers 127701, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    2. Schmid, Erwin & Sinabell, Franz, 2004. "Multifunctionality of Agriculture: Political Concepts, Analytical Challenges and an Empirical Case Study," Discussion Papers DP-08-2004, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development.
    3. Franz Hackl & Martin Halla & Gerald J Pruckner, 2005. "Coasian payments for agricultural external benefits - an empirical cross-section analysis," Economics working papers 2005-11, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    4. Sande, Doris N. & Mullen, Jeffrey D. & Nzaku, Kilungu, 2009. "Amenity benefits and public policy: An application to the Georgia Pecan Industry," 2009 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2009, Atlanta, Georgia 46851, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Simona Miškolci, 2005. "The direct economic impact of alternative types of the rural tourism [Hodnocení přímého ekonomického vlivu vybraných forem venkovské turistiky]," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 53(6), pages 101-108.
    6. Schmid, Erwin & Sinabell, Franz & Hofreither, Markus F., 2007. "Phasing out of environmentally harmful subsidies: Consequences of the 2003 CAP reform," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 596-604, January.
    7. L.P. Mahé & Philippe Le Goffe & . Association Française de Génie Rural, 2000. "Agriculture raisonnée et politique agricole de précision : solutions aux problèmes agri-environnementaux ?," Post-Print hal-02278980, HAL.
    8. Kan, Iddo & Haim, David & Rapaport-Rom, Mickey & Shechter, Mordechai, 2009. "Environmental amenities and optimal agricultural land use: The case of Israel," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1893-1898, April.
    9. Aliza Fleischer & Yacov Tsur, 2009. "The Amenity Value of Agricultural Landscape and Rural–Urban Land Allocation," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 132-153, February.
    10. Wood, Nancy & Halbrendt, Catherine K. & Liang, Chyi-Lyi (Kathleen) & Wang, Qingbin, 2000. "Interdependence Of Agriculture And Tourism: Quantifying The Value Of The Agricultural Working Landscape In Vermont," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21814, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Peterson, Jeffrey M. & Boisvert, Richard N., 2000. "Optimal Land Conversion At The Rural-Urban Fringe With Positive And Negative Agricultural Externalities," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21722, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Baylis, Kathy & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon & Simon, Leo, 2008. "Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: A comparison," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 753-764, May.
    13. Lava Prakash Yadav & Stephen O’Neill & Tom van Rensburg, 2013. "Economic Crisis and the Restructuring of Wage Setting Mechanisms for Vulnerable Workers in Ireland," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 44(2), pages 221-245.
    14. Francois Bonnieux & Michel Pech & Pierre Rainelli, 2000. "Multifonctionnalité de l'agriculture : prise en compte des aspects non marchands de l'agriculture," Working Papers hal-01594093, HAL.
    15. Mara Thiene & Yacov Tsur, 2013. "Agricultural Landscape Value and Irrigation Water Policy," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 641-653, September.
    16. Peterson, Jeffrey M., 1999. "Optimal Agricultural Land Pricing Policies Under Multiple Externalities In A Global Economy," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21613, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    17. Xin Yang & Xiaohe Zhou & Shuwen Cao & Anlu Zhang, 2021. "Preferences in Farmland Eco-Compensation Methods: A Case Study of Wuhan, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    2. List, John A. & Shogren, Jason F., 2002. "Calibration of Willingness-to-Accept," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 219-233, March.
    3. Vossler, Christian A. & Kerkvliet, Joe & Polasky, Stephen & Gainutdinova, Olesya, 2003. "Externally validating contingent valuation: an open-space survey and referendum in Corvallis, Oregon," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 261-277, June.
    4. Liljas, Bengt & Blumenschein, Karen, 2000. "On hypothetical bias and calibration in cost-benefit studies," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 53-70, May.
    5. List, John A. & Shogren, Jason F., 1998. "Calibration of the difference between actual and hypothetical valuations in a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 193-205, October.
    6. Shogren, Jason F., 2006. "Experimental Methods and Valuation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 969-1027, Elsevier.
    7. Vivien Foster & Ian J. Bateman & David Harley, 1998. "Real and hypothetical willingness to pay for environmental preservation: a non-experimental comparison," Chapters, in: Melinda Acutt & Pamela Mason (ed.), Environmental Valuation, Economic Policy and Sustainability, chapter 3, pages 35-50, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
    9. Richard O‘Conor & Magnus Johannesson & Per-Olov Johansson, 1999. "Stated Preferences, Real Behaviour and Anchoring: Some Empirical Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 235-248, March.
    10. John A. List, 2001. "Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auctions for Sportscards," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1498-1507, December.
    11. Smith, V. Kerry & Mansfield, Carol, 1998. "Buying Time: Real and Hypothetical Offers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 209-224, November.
    12. Kuosmanen, Timo & Kortelainen, Mika, 2007. "Valuing environmental factors in cost-benefit analysis using data envelopment analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 56-65, April.
    13. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    14. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    15. Pamela Campa & Lucija Muehlenbachs, 2024. "Addressing Environmental Justice through In-Kind Court Settlements," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 415-446, February.
    16. Rose, Steven K. & Clark, Jeremy & Poe, Gregory L. & Rondeau, Daniel & Schulze, William D., 2002. "The private provision of public goods: tests of a provision point mechanism for funding green power programs," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 131-155, February.
    17. Bernt Kartman & Nils‐Olov Stålhammar & Magnus Johannesson, 1996. "Valuation of health changes with the contingent valuation method: A test of scope and question order effects," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(6), pages 531-541, November.
    18. Nick Hanley & Felix Schlapfer, "undated". "Calibration of Stated Willingness to Pay for Public Goods with Voting and Tax Liability Data: Provision of Landscape Amenities in Switzerland," Working Papers 2002_2, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    19. Gubanova, Tatiana & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & McMillan, Melville, 2009. "‘Pocket and Pot’: Hypothetical Bias in a No-Free-Riding Public Contribution Game," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49318, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Spencer, Michael A. & Swallow, Stephen K. & Miller, Christopher J., 1998. "Valuing Water Quality Monitoring: A Contingent Valuation Experiment Involving Hypothetical and Real Payments," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 28-42, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:10:y:1997:i:2:p:189-205. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.