IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ohsesp/28325.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Competing For Scarce Land: Food Security And Farmland Preservation

Author

Listed:
  • Tweeten, Luther G.

Abstract

Projections indicate the world is entering a new era of tighter food supply relative to demand than in recent decades. Although urban areas in the U.S. occupy only 3 percent of the nation's land, the average state supplies too small a share of global food needs to motivate it to preserve land for food security. Citizens like open spaces, but scenic areas are preferred to farmland. Thus, if preserving land for future needs is important, the issue must be addressed at the national and international level as well as the state level. Statistical analysis indicates most U.S. farmland transferred to other uses has been the result of unprofitability of farming rather than the result of urban encroachment.

Suggested Citation

  • Tweeten, Luther G., 1997. "Competing For Scarce Land: Food Security And Farmland Preservation," Economics and Sociology Occasional Papers - ESO Series 28325, Ohio State University, Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ohsesp:28325
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.28325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/28325/files/eso2385.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.28325?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. Bergstrom, John C. & Dillman, B. L. & Stoll, John R., 1985. "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land: The Case of Prime Agricultural Land," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 139-149, July.
    2. Jeffrey Kline & Dennis Wichelns, 1996. "Public Preferences Regarding the Goals of Farmland Preservation Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(4), pages 538-549.
    3. Jeffrey Kline & Dennis Wichelns, 1994. "Using Referendum Data to Characterize Public Support for Purchasing Development Rights to Farmland," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(2), pages 223-233.
    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. 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.
    2. Bergstrom, John, 1999. "Exploring and Expanding the Landscape Values Terrain," Western Region Archives 321704, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    3. Joshua Duke & Lori Lynch, 2007. "Gauging support for innovative farmland preservation techniques," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 40(2), pages 123-155, June.
    4. Bergstrom, John C., 1998. "Exploring And Expanding The Landscape Values Terrain," Faculty Series 16653, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    5. Lynch, Lori & Duke, Joshua M., 2007. "Economic Benefits of Farmland Preservation: Evidence from the United States," Working Papers 7342, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    6. Bergstrom, John C., 2001. "Postproductivism And Rural Land Values," Faculty Series 16689, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    7. Skaggs, Rhonda K. & Harper, Wilmer M., 1999. "Predicting Land Purchase Behavior In A Fast Growth, Intensely Agricultural County," 1999 Annual Meeting, July 11-14, 1999, Fargo, ND 35711, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    8. Marangon, Francesco & Visintin, Francesca, 2007. "Rural landscape valuation in a cross-border region," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 84.
    9. Kline, Jeffrey & Wichelns, Dennis, 1998. "Measuring heterogeneous preferences for preserving farmland and open space," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 211-224, August.
    10. 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.
    11. Duke, Joshua M. & Johnston, Robert J., 2006. "Systematic Influences of Policy Implementation and Conservation Agents on Willingness to Pay for Land Preservation," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21234, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Bergstrom, John C., 2001. "The Role And Value Of Natural Capital In Regional Landscapes," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 1-14, August.
    13. Walls, Margaret & McConnell, Virginia & Kopits, Elizabeth, 2003. "How Well Can Markets for Development Rights Work? Evaluating a Farmland Preservation Program," RFF Working Paper Series dp-03-08, Resources for the Future.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Thomas J. Nechyba & Randall P. Walsh, 2004. "Urban Sprawl," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 177-200, Fall.
    18. Poe, Gregory, 1997. ""Maximizing the Environmental Benefits per Dollar Expended" An Economic Interpretation and Review of Agricultural Environmental Benefits and Costs," EB Series 186405, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    19. Norris, Patricia E. & Deaton, Brady J., Jr., 2001. "Understanding The Demand For Farmland Preservation: Implications For Michigan Policies," Staff Paper Series 11791, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    20. Duke, Joshua M. & Aull-Hyde, Rhonda, 2002. "Identifying public preferences for land preservation using the analytic hierarchy process," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 131-145, August.

    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:ohsesp:28325. 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/daohsus.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.