IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae08/44170.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Efficient Supply of Cultural Landscape in a CGE Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Rodseth, K.L.

Abstract

It is often assumed that the agricultural sector produces public goods or positive externalities that benefit the domestic consumers, in addition to its production of private goods. Efficient agricultural support is consequently directed towards resolving market failures caused by the existence of these public goods or externalities. We illustrate how this can be achieved in a Computable General Equilibrium model for one multifunctional aspect of agricultural production, namely the production of cultural landscape. Using a public good modeling framework as point of departure, we develop supply- and willingness to pay functions for cultural landscape. Governmental agricultural support is adjusted to achieve efficient supply of the public good. As an illustration we apply our framework using a general equilibrium model for Norway. We show that efficient supply of cultural landscape can be achieved even with a tremendous reduction in initial overall support of agricultural production.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodseth, K.L., 2008. "Efficient Supply of Cultural Landscape in a CGE Framework," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44170, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae08:44170
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.44170
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/44170/files/569.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.44170?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rigoberto A. Lopez & Farhed A. Shah & Marilyn A. Altobello, 1994. "Amenity Benefits and the Optimal Allocation of Land," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(1), pages 53-62.
    2. Rutherford, Thomas F, 1999. "Applied General Equilibrium Modeling with MPSGE as a GAMS Subsystem: An Overview of the Modeling Framework and Syntax," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 14(1-2), pages 1-46, October.
    3. 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.
    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. Huber, Robert & Lehmann, Bernard, 2010. "Economies of Scope in the Agricultural Provision of Ecosystem Services: An Application to a High Cost Production Region," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 59(02), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Huber, Robert & Lehmann, Bernard, 2010. "Economies of Scope in the Agricultural Provision of Ecosystem Services: An Application to a High Cost Production Region," Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, vol. 59(2).

    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. Kenneth Løvold RØDSETH, 2008. "Efficient Supply of Cultural Landscape in a CGE Framework," EcoMod2008 23800116, EcoMod.
    2. Kline, Jeffrey & Wichelns, Dennis, 1998. "Measuring heterogeneous preferences for preserving farmland and open space," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 211-224, August.
    3. 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.
    4. Lovell, Sabrina J. & Lynch, Lori, 2002. "Hedonic Price Analysis Of Easement Payments In Agricultural Land Preservation Programs," Working Papers 28564, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    5. Rolf Jens Brunstad & Ivar Gaasland & Erling Vardal, 2005. "Multifunctionality of agriculture: an inquiry into the complementarity between landscape preservation and food security," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(4), pages 469-488, December.
    6. Lori Lynch & Wesley N. Musser, 2001. "A Relative Efficiency Analysis of Farmland Preservation Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 577-594.
    7. 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.
    8. Yerushalmi, Erez, 2012. "Measuring the administrative water allocation mechanism and agricultural amenities," Economic Research Papers 270633, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    9. Javier Lozano Ibáñez & Javier Rey-Maquieira Palmer & Carlos Mario Gómez Gómez, 2004. "Land, Environmental Externalities and Tourism Development," Working Papers 2004.22, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    10. 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.
    11. Nick Hanley & Felix Schlapfer, "undated". "What determines the demand for programmes providing local environmental public goods," Working Papers 2001_7, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    12. 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.
    13. Hermeling, Claudia & Klement, Jan Henrik & Koesler, Simon & Köhler, Jonathan & Klement, Dorothee, 2015. "Sailing into a dilemma," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 34-53.
    14. Hafner, Marco & Yerushalmi, Erez & Andersson, Fredrik L. & Burtea, Teodor, 2020. "Quantifying the macroeconomic cost of night-time bathroom visits: an application to the UK," CAFE Working Papers 5, Centre for Accountancy, Finance and Economics (CAFE), Birmingham City Business School, Birmingham City University.
    15. Bretschger, Lucas & Lechthaler, Filippo & Rausch, Sebastian & Zhang, Lin, 2017. "Knowledge diffusion, endogenous growth, and the costs of global climate policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 47-72.
    16. Yoonkyo Cho & Taehwan Kim & Jaewhak Roh, 2021. "An analysis of the effects of electronic commerce on the Korean economy using the CGE model," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 831-854, September.
    17. Dai, Hancheng & Mischke, Peggy & Xie, Xuxuan & Xie, Yang & Masui, Toshihiko, 2016. "Closing the gap? Top-down versus bottom-up projections of China’s regional energy use and CO2 emissions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1355-1373.
    18. Mark Brady & Konrad Kellermann & Christoph Sahrbacher & Ladislav Jelinek, 2009. "Impacts of Decoupled Agricultural Support on Farm Structure, Biodiversity and Landscape Mosaic: Some EU Results," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 563-585, September.
    19. Javier Ferri & Antonio G. Gómez-Plana & Joan Martín-Montaner, "undated". "International inmigration and mobility across sectors: an exploration of alternative scenarios for Spain," Studies on the Spanish Economy 124, FEDEA.
    20. Sebastian Rausch & Valerie J. Karplus, 2014. "Markets versus Regulation: The Efficiency and Distributional Impacts of U.S. Climate Policy Proposals," The Energy Journal, , vol. 35(1_suppl), pages 199-228, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Land Economics/Use;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:eaae08:44170. 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: AgEcon Search (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.