IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tea/wpaper/0814.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Access to farmland for walking in the Republic of Ireland – The attitude of landowners

Author

Listed:
  • Cathal Buckley

    (Rural Economy and Development Programme, Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland)

  • Stephen Hynes

    (Rural Economy and Development Programme, Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland)

  • Tom van Rensburg

    (Department of Economics, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland)

  • Edel Doherty

    (Gibson Institute of Land, Food and the Environment, Queen’s University Belfast)

Abstract

This paper explores the attitudes of landowners across Ireland to the wider provision of public access for recreational walking using a multinomial logit model. The study investigates the level of compensation required to improve the supply of this public good. Results indicate that 51% of landowners are not willing to provide access (non providers), 21% are willing to provide access free of charge (free providers) and 28% sought compensation (willing providers). Our findings indicate that participation by landowners in a proposed public access scheme is influenced by landowners’ experience with walkers, farm type, farm insurance costs, household demographics, regional variations and participation in other agri-environment schemes. Median willingness to accept for the cohort of landowners seeking compensation was found to be €0.46 per metre of walkway.

Suggested Citation

  • Cathal Buckley & Stephen Hynes & Tom van Rensburg & Edel Doherty, 2008. "Access to farmland for walking in the Republic of Ireland – The attitude of landowners," Working Papers 0814, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    • Handle: RePEc:tea:wpaper:0814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.teagasc.ie/rural-economy/downloads/workingpapers/08WPRE14.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2008
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Christie, 1999. "An Assessment of the Economic Effectiveness of Recreation Policy Using Contingent Valuation," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 547-564.
    2. Joseph C. Cooper, 2003. "A Joint Framework for Analysis of Agri-Environmental Payment Programs," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 976-987.
    3. Sabina L. Shaikh & Lili Sun & G. Cornelis Van Kooten, 2007. "Are Agricultural Values a Reliable Guide in Determining Landowners' Decisions to Create Forest Carbon Sinks?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 55(1), pages 97-114, March.
    4. Ian Langford* & Areti Kontogianni & Mihalis Skourtos & Stavros Georgiou & Ian Bateman, 1998. "Multivariate Mixed Models for Open-Ended Contingent Valuation Data: Willingness To Pay For Conservation of Monk Seals," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(4), pages 443-456, December.
    5. Kanninen Barbara J., 1995. "Bias in Discrete Response Contingent Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 114-125, January.
    6. Kevin J. Boyle & Hugh F. MacDonald & Hsiang-tai Cheng & Daniel W. McCollum, 1998. "Bid Design and Yea Saying in Single-Bounded, Dichotomous-Choice Questions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(1), pages 49-64.
    7. Nick Hanley & Clive L. Spash, 1993. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 205.
    8. Kline, Jeffrey D. & Alig, Ralph J. & Johnson, Rebecca L., 2000. "Forest owner incentives to protect riparian habitat," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 29-43, April.
    9. Topp, C. F. E. & Mitchell, M., 2003. "Forecasting the environmental and socio-economic consequences of changes in the Common Agricultural Policy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 227-252, April.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Andrew Mill, Greig & van Rensburg, Tom M. & Hynes, Stephen & Dooley, Conor, 2007. "Preferences for multiple use forest management in Ireland: Citizen and consumer perpectives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 642-653, January.
    13. Richard Williams, 2006. "Review of Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata, Second Edition, by Long and Freese," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 6(2), pages 273-278, June.
    14. R. M. Bennett & R. B. Tranter & R. J. P. Blaney, 2003. "The Value of Countryside Access: A Contingent Valuation Survey of Visitors to the Ridgeway National Trail in the United Kingdom," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(5), pages 659-671.
    15. Stephen Hynes & Cathal Buckley & Tom van Rensburg, 2007. "Recreational Pursuits on Marginal Farm Land: A Discrete-Choice Model of Irish Farm Commonage Recreation," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 38(1), pages 63-84.
    16. Creel, Michael, 1998. "A Note on Consistent Estimation of Mean WTP Using a Misspecified Logit Contingent Valuation Model," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 277-284, May.
    17. Carson, Richard T & Flores, Nicholas A, 2000. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt75k752s7, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    18. Paul R. Portney, 1994. "The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 3-17, Fall.
    19. Breen, James P. & Hennessy, Thia C. & Thorne, Fiona S., 2005. "The effect of decoupling on the decision to produce: An Irish case study," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 129-144, April.
    20. Sullivan, Jay & Amacher, Gregory S. & Chapman, Sara, 2005. "Forest banking and forest landowners forgoing management rights for guaranteed financial returns," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 381-392, March.
    21. Isabel Vanslembrouck & Guido Van Huylenbroeck & Wim Verbeke, 2002. "Determinants of the Willingness of Belgian Farmers to Participate in Agri‐environmental Measures," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 489-511, November.
    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. Peter Howley & Cathal Buckley & Stephen Hynes & Tom van Rensburg, 2009. "Understanding preferences for walking attributes," Working Papers 0907, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.

    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. Kilgore, Michael A. & Snyder, Stephanie A. & Schertz, Joseph & Taff, Steven J., 2008. "What does it take to get family forest owners to enroll in a forest stewardship-type program?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(7-8), pages 507-514, October.
    2. Peter Howley & Edel Doherty & Cathal Buckley & Stephen Hynes & Tom van Rensburg & Stuart Green, 2010. "Public access to the countryside: An exploration of the costs and benefits of farmland walking trails," Working Papers 1006, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    3. Halkos, George, 2013. "The relationship between people’s attitude and willingness to pay for river conservation," MPRA Paper 50560, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    5. Rabotyagov, Sergey S. & Lin, Sonja, 2013. "Small forest landowner preferences for working forest conservation contract attributes: A case of Washington State, USA," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 307-330.
    6. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clement A., 2003. "Willingness to pay for different degrees of Abundance of Elephants," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48966, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    7. Luís Cruz & Paula Simões & Eduardo Barata, 2014. "Combining Observed and Contingent Travel Behaviour: The Best of Both Worlds?," Notas Económicas, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra, issue 40, pages 7-25, December.
    8. Seroa da Motta, Ronaldo & Ortiz, Ramon Arigoni, 2018. "Costs and Perceptions Conditioning Willingness to Accept Payments for Ecosystem Services in a Brazilian Case," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 333-342.
    9. Ojea, Elena & Loureiro, Maria L., 2011. "Identifying the scope effect on a meta-analysis of biodiversity valuation studies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 706-724, September.
    10. Jin Jianjun, 2008. "Economic Valuation of Black-faced Spoonbill Conservation in Macao," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper tp200801t2, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Jan 2008.
    11. Sælensminde, Kjartan, 2003. "Embedding effects in valuation of non-market goods," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 59-72, January.
    12. Andrew Mill, Greig & van Rensburg, Tom M. & Hynes, Stephen & Dooley, Conor, 2007. "Preferences for multiple use forest management in Ireland: Citizen and consumer perpectives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 642-653, January.
    13. Richard Yao & Pamela Kaval, 2008. "Valuing Biodiversity Enhancement in New Zealand," Working Papers in Economics 08/07, University of Waikato.
    14. Ressurreição, Adriana & Gibbons, James & Dentinho, Tomaz Ponce & Kaiser, Michel & Santos, Ricardo S. & Edwards-Jones, Gareth, 2011. "Economic valuation of species loss in the open sea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 729-739, February.
    15. 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.
    16. López-Mosquera, Natalia & Sánchez, Mercedes, 2011. "The influence of personal values in the economic-use valuation of peri-urban green spaces: An application of the means-end chain theory," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 875-889.
    17. Saelensminde, Kjartan, 2006. "Causes and consequences of lexicographic choices in stated choice studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 331-340, September.
    18. Buckley, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & Mechan, Sarah, 2012. "Operating or not Operating at the Margin: Farmers Willingness to Adopt a Riparian Buffer Zone," Working Papers 148830, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    19. Halkos, George, 2012. "Assessing the economic value of protecting artificial lakes," MPRA Paper 39557, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2012. "Determinants of willingness to pay for coastal zone quality improvement," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 391-399.

    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:tea:wpaper:0814. 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: John Lennon (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/reteaie.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.