IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/revage/v28y2006i4p515-530..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Resolving Range Conflict in Nevada? Buyouts and Other Compensation Alternatives

Author

Listed:
  • G. Cornelis van Kooten
  • Roy W. Thomsen
  • Tom Hobby

Abstract

To mitigate the adverse effects of reduced access to public forage, ranchers may require financial or other forms of "compensation." In this paper, we use results from a survey of Nevada ranchers to examine their willingness to sell grazing permits and participate in other schemes that enable them to continue ranching in spite of declining access to public forage. On average, ranchers demand $255 per animal unit month to sell grazing permits, while support for other programs, some of which are performance based, depends on whether respondents trust public agencies and intend to pass their ranch onto an heir.

Suggested Citation

  • G. Cornelis van Kooten & Roy W. Thomsen & Tom Hobby, 2006. "Resolving Range Conflict in Nevada? Buyouts and Other Compensation Alternatives," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 28(4), pages 515-530.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:revage:v:28:y:2006:i:4:p:515-530.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-9353.2006.00319.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    2. Bell, Caroline D. & Roberts, Roland K. & English, Burton C. & Park, William M., 1994. "A Logit Analysis Of Participation In Tennessee'S Forest Stewardship Program," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Torell, L. Allen & Rimbey, Neil R. & Bartlett, E. Tom & Van Tassell, Larry W. & Tanaka, John A., 2001. "An Evaluation Of The Pria Grazing Fee Formula," Current Issues in Rangeland Resource Economics: Symposium Proceedings (2001) 16627, Western Regional Coordinating Committee on Rangeland Economics: WCC-55.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sabina Shaikh & Pavel Suchánek & Lili Sun & G. Cornelis van Kooten, 2003. "Does Inclusion of Landowners’ Non-Market Values Lower Costs of Creating Carbon Forest Sinks?," Working Papers 2003-03, University of Victoria, Department of Economics, Resource Economics and Policy Analysis Research Group.
    2. Shaikh, Sabina L. & Sun, Lili & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2005. "Are Agricultural Values a Reliable Guide in Determining Landowners’ Decisions to Create Carbon Forest Sinks?," Working Papers 37017, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    3. Sabina Shaikh & Lili Sun & G. Cornelis van Kooten, 2005. "The Effect of Uncertainty on Contingent Valuation Estimates: A Comparison," Working Papers 2005-15, University of Victoria, Department of Economics, Resource Economics and Policy Analysis Research Group.
    4. Sun, Lili & van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Voss, Graham M., 2005. "Divergence between WTA and WTP Revisited: Livestock Grazing on Public Range," Working Papers 37014, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    5. Suchanek, Pavel & Shaikh, Sabina L. & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2001. "Carbon Incentive Mechanisms and Land-Use Implications for Canadian Agriculture," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20607, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Sun, Lili & van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Voss, Graham M., 2006. "Quality of Life as an Explanation of the Divergence between Ranchers' WTA and WTP for Public Forage," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21162, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Cooper, Joseph C., 2002. "Flexible Functional Form Estimation of Willingness to Pay Using Dichotomous Choice Data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 267-279, March.
    8. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    9. Franz Hackl & Gerald J. Pruckner, 2005. "Warm glow, free‐riding and vehicle neutrality in a health‐related contingent valuation study," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 293-306, March.
    10. Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. & Aiew, Wipon & Woodward, Richard T., 2004. "Willingness to Pay for Irradiated Food: A Non Hypothetical Market Experiment," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24995, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    12. Olga Lucía Cadena Durán & Andrés Mauricio Gómez Sánchez, 2014. "Racionalidades y prácticas campesinas cafeteras en el departamento del Huila, Colombia," Revista Economía y Región, Universidad Tecnológica de Bolívar, vol. 8(2), pages 157-184, December.
    13. Clarke, Philip M., 1998. "Cost-benefit analysis and mammographic screening: a travel cost approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 767-787, December.
    14. Philippe Polome & Anne van der Veen & Peter Geurts, 2006. "Is Referendum the Same as Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(2), pages 174-188.
    15. G. Cornelis van Kooten & Sabina Lee Shaikh & Pavel Suchánek, 2002. "Mitigating Climate Change by Planting Trees: The Transaction Costs Trap," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(4), pages 559-572.
    16. Yoonae Jo, 2001. "Does college education nourish egoism?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 4(2), pages 115-128, September.
    17. Pere Riera & Raúl Brey & Guillermo Gándara, 2008. "Bid design for non-parametric contingent valuation with a single bounded dichotomous choice format," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 186(3), pages 43-60, October.
    18. Kerstin K Zander & Gillian B Ainsworth & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Stephen T Garnett, 2014. "Threatened Bird Valuation in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, June.
    19. Seck, Abdoulaye & Thiam, Djiby Racine, 2022. "Understanding consumer attitudes to and valuation of organic food in Sub-Saharan Africa: A double-bound contingent method applied in Dakar, Senegal," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 17(1), March.
    20. Gren, Ing-Marie & Carlsson, Mattias, 2012. "Revealed payments for biodiversity protection in Swedish forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 55-62.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q00 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - General
    • R14 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Land Use Patterns

    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:revage:v:28:y:2006:i:4:p:515-530.. 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: Oxford University Press or Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.