Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Amenity Benefits and Public Policy: An Application to the Connecticut Dairy Sector

  • Rigoberto A. Lopez (a1), Marilyn A. Altobello (a1) and Farhed A. Shah (a1)

Abstract

This article develops a conceptual framework for analyzing the role of state-level policies towards the dairy sector in the presence of farmland amenity benefits, and applies it to Connecticut. Milk supply, demand and amenity benefit functions are estimated, and three exogenously determined milk prices are considered. The empirical findings show, under each price scenario, the extent to which land is underallocated to the dairy sector if amenity benefits are ignored. Analysis of policy options reveals that a partial production cost subsidy represents the least-cost alternative for attaining the socially optimal solution for the region.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Andersen, Kenneth B. and Malia, George T.. Connecticut Farmland Preservation. Connecticut Department of Agriculture, January 1991.
Beasley, Steven, Workman, William G., and Williams, Nancy A.. “Amenity Values of Urban Fringe Farmland: A Contingent Valuation Approach.Growth and Change 17(1986):7078.
Bergstrom, J., Dillman, B., and Stoll, J.. “Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land: The Case of Prime Agricultural Land.SJ. Agr. Econ. 17( 1985): 139149.
Brookshire, David S., Randall, Alan, and Stoll, John R.. “Valuing Increments and Decrements in Natural Resource Service Flows.Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 63(1980):478488.
Cocchi, Horacio, Bravo-Ureta, Boris E., and Cooke, Stephen. “A Growth Accounting Analysis of Cost Efficiency in Milk Production for Six Northern States in the U.S.” Unpublished manuscript, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, 1994.
Connecticut State Data Center. Connecticut Summary of Socioeconomic Characteristics: 1990 Census Sample Count Extract Report. Hartford, Connecticut: Office of Policy Management, 1992.
Fallen, Richard F., Blayney, Don P., and Miller, James J.. Dairy: Background for 1990 Farm Legislation. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Staff Report No. AGES9020, 1990.
Fishel, W.A.Urbanization of Agricultural Lands: A Review of the National Land Study.Land Econ. 58(1982): 236259.
Foster, J., Halstead, J., and Stevens, T.. “Measuring the Non-Market Value of Agricultural Land: A Case Study.” Amherst, Massachusetts: Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Bulletin No. 672, 1982.
Gardner, Bruce L.Commercial Agriculture in Metropolitan Areas: Economic and Regulatory Issues.Agr. and Res. Econ. Rev. 23(1994): 100109.
Gardner B., Delworth. “The Economics of Agricultural Land Preservation.Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 59(1977): 1027–36.
Grisley, W. and Gitu, K.W.. “The Production Structure of Pennsylvania Dairy Farms.N. J. Agr. Res. Econ. 13(1984):245253.
Gujarati, Damodar N.Basic Econometrics, Second Edition. New York, McGraw-Hill. 1988.
Haidacher, Richard C, Blaylock, James R., and Myers, Lester H.. Consumer Demand for Dairy Products. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Economics Report No. 586, March 1988.
Halstead, John M.Measuring the Nonmarket Value of Massachusetts Agricultural Land.J. of the N. Agr. Econ. Council 13(1984): 1219.
Huang, Kuo S.U.S. Demand for Food: A Complete System of Price and Income Effects. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Technical Bulletin No. 1714, 1985.
Hubbard, L. J.Two-tier Pricing for Milk: A Re-examination.J. Agr. Econ. 43(1992):343354.
Just, Richard E., Hueth, Darreil, and Schmitz, Andrew. Applied Welfare Economics and Public Policy. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 1992.
Lapping, Mark B. and Dale Forster, V.. “Farmland and Agricultural Policy in Sweden: An Integrated Approach.Intl. Reg. Sci. Rev. 7(1982):293302.
Lee, Tsoung-Chao, Bravo-Ureta, Boris E., and Charles, K. Ling. Technical Efficiency of Dairy Production in New England: Co-op versus Nonmembers. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Cooperative Service, Research Report No. 57, 1986.
Lopez, Rigoberto A., Shah, Farhed A., and Altobello, Marilyn A.. “Amenity Benefits and the Optimal Allocation of Land.Land Econ. 70(1994):5362.
McDowell, Howard, Fleming, Ann M., and Spinelli, Felix. U.S. Milk Markets Under Alternative Federal Order Pricing Policies. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Staff Report No. AGES 9068, 1990.
Moore, Richard. Japanese Agriculture: Patterns of Rural Development. Boulder, Colorado, Westview Press. 1990.
Plaut, T. R.Urban Expansion and Loss of Farmland in the United States: Implications for the Future.Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 62(1980): 537548.
Quiroga, Ricardo E. and Bravo-Ureta, Boris E.. “Short- and Long-Run Adjustments in Dairy Production: A Profit Function Analysis.Appi. Econ. 24(1992):607616.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Statistics. Washington, D.C: Government Printing Office, Various years.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. The Basic Mechanisms of U.S. Farm Policy. Washington, D.C: Economic Research Service, Miscellaneous Publication No. 1479, January 1990.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Prices Received by Minnesota-Wisconsin Manufacturing Grade Milk, 1992 Summary. Washington, D.C: Agricultural Statistics Board, Report Pr l-4(a3), June 1993.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. World Dairy Situation. Washington, D.C: Foreign Agricultural Service, Circular No. FD-2-91, November 1991.
U.S. Department of Commerce. City and County Data Book. Washington, D.C: Bureau of the Census, 1988.
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1987 Census of Agriculture. Washington, D.C: Bureau of the Census, 1991.
Waggoner, Paul E.The Distribution of People and Crops Across the Land o/Connecticut. The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven, Bulletin No. 8383, July 1986.
Young, Trevor and Geoffrey Allen, P.. “Methods for Valuing Countryside Amenity Benefits.J. Agr. Econ. 37(1986):349364.

Keywords

Amenity Benefits and Public Policy: An Application to the Connecticut Dairy Sector

  • Rigoberto A. Lopez (a1), Marilyn A. Altobello (a1) and Farhed A. Shah (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed