IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/erevae/v23y1996i4p421-36.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Public Preferences for the Environmental Amenities Provided by Farmland

Author

Listed:
  • Kline, Jeffrey
  • Wichelns, Dennis

Abstract

As farmland amenities have become relatively more scarce than food and fibre in developed countries, public concern has shifted away from increasing agricultural production, towards protecting rural environmental quality. Choosing appropriate policies requires accurate information describing public preferences for different amenities. This paper uses qualitative information provided by focus groups and survey data from a sample of Rhode Island (USA) residents, to identify and compare socially valued environmental amenities associated with farmland and open space. Public preferences for preserving farmland compare favourably with preferences for preserving other types of open space. Lands that include endangered species habitats and important groundwater resources are preferred. Copyright 1996 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Kline, Jeffrey & Wichelns, Dennis, 1996. "Measuring Public Preferences for the Environmental Amenities Provided by Farmland," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 23(4), pages 421-436.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:23:y:1996:i:4:p:421-36
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kathryn Anderson & Diana Weinhold, 2005. "Do Conservation Easements Reduce Land Prices? The Case of South Central Wisconsin," Urban/Regional 0506001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Thilo W. Glebe, 2007. "The Environmental Impact of European Farming: How Legitimate Are Agri-Environmental Payments?," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(1), pages 87-102.
    3. Dunne, W. & O'Connell, J.J., 2002. "A Multicommodity EU Policy Framework Incorporating Public Good Criteria into the Direct Payment System in Agriculture," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24801, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Hellerstein, Daniel & Nickerson, Cynthia J. & Cooper, Joseph C. & Feather, Peter & Gadsby, Dwight M. & Mullarkey, Daniel J. & Tegene, Abebayehu & Barnard, Charles H., 2002. "Farmland Protection: The Role Of Public Preferences For Rural Amenities," Agricultural Economic Reports 33963, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    5. Atance Muniz, Ignacio & Bardaji, Isabel & Tio, Carlos, 2002. "Intervention in Agricultural Systems that Provide Positive Environmental Externalities: an Evaluation of Alternative Instruments," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24810, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Peter Howley & Stephen Hynes & Cathal O’Donoghue, 2009. "The citizen versus consumer hypothesis: Do welfare estimates differ?," Working Papers 0911, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    7. José A. Gómez-Limón & Ignacio Atance, 2004. "Identification of Public Objectives Related to Agricultural Sector Support," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2004/57, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    8. Geoghegan, Jacqueline & Lynch, Lori & Bucholtz, Shawn, 2003. "Capitalization of Open Spaces into Housing Values and the Residential Property Tax Revenue Impacts of Agricultural Easement Programs," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 33-45, April.
    9. Peter Howley & Stephen Hynes & Cathal O’Donoghue, 2009. "Countryside Preferences: Exploring individuals’ WTP for the protection of traditional rural landscapes," Working Papers 0906, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    10. Gomez-Limon, J.A. & Atance, I., 2004. "Identification of public objectives related to agricultural sector support," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(8-9), pages 1045-1071, December.
    11. Bockstael, Nancy E. & Irwin, Elena G., 1999. "Economics and the Land Use-Environment Link," Working Papers 197860, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    12. Howley, Peter & Hynes, Stephen & O'Donoghue, Cathal, 2010. "The citizen versus consumer distinction: An exploration of individuals' preferences in Contingent Valuation studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1524-1531, May.
    13. Colyer, Dale, 1998. "Farmland Preservation Programs," Conference Papers 19102, West Virginia University, Department of Agricultural Resource Economics.
    14. Katrin Oltmer & Peter Nijkamp & Raymond Florax & Floor Brouwer, 2000. "A Meta-Analysis of Environmental Impacts of Agri-Environmental Policies in the European Union," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 00-083/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    15. Peter Howley & Cathal Buckley & Stephen Hynes & Tom van Rensburg, 2009. "Understanding preferences for walking attributes," Working Papers 0907, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:erevae:v:23:y:1996:i:4:p:421-36. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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.