Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T22:31:57.224Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimation of the Nonmarket Benefits of Agricultural Land Retention in Eastern Canada

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

J.M. Bowker  and
D.D. Didychuk
J.M. Bowker
Affiliation:
USDA Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, 320 Green Street, Athens, GA 30602-2044
D.D. Didychuk
Affiliation:
Farm Loan Board, Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture and Marketing, Box 550, Truro, Nova Scotia, CANADA B2N 5E3
Get access

Abstract

We assess the nonmarket value for retention of farmland in the Moncton area of New Brunswick. We examine a number of factors explaining household external values for farmland preservation and expand on previous work by Beasley et al., Bergstrom et al., and Halstead. Our findings indicate that the marginal external benefit of preserving farmland in general in this region is small compared to the market price and that spatial embedding is not automatic in contingent valuation studies.

Type
Articles
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , October 1994 , pp. 218 - 225
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adamowicz, W.L. “Valuation of Environmental Amenities.” Staff Paper 91-06, Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta, 1991.Google Scholar
Arrow, K., Solow, R., Portney, P.R., Leamer, E.E., Radner, R., Schuman, H. Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, January, 1993.Google Scholar
Beasley, S.D., Workman, W.G., and Williams, N.A. “Estimating the Amenity Values of Urban Fringe Farmland—A Contingent Valuation Approach: Note.” Growth and Change 17 (1986): 70–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergstrom, J.C., Dillman, B.L., and Stoll, J.R. “Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land: The Case of Prime Agricultural Land.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 17 (1985): 139–49.Google Scholar
Bowker, J.M., and Stoll, J.R. “Use of Dichotomous Choice Nonmarket Methods to Value the Whooping Crane Resource.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 70 (1988): 372–81.Google Scholar
Bowker, J.M., and MacDonald, H.F. “An Economic Analysis of Localized Pollution: Rendering Emissions in a Residential Setting.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 41 (1993): 45–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, T.A., and Huppert, D.D. “OLS verses ML Estimation of Nonmarket Resources with Payment Card Interval Data.” Journal Environmental Economics and Management 17 (1989): 230–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, T.A., and James, M. “Efficient Estimation Methods for “Closed Ended” Contingent Valuation Surveys.” Review of Economics and Statistics 69(May 1987): 269–79.Google Scholar
Carson, R.T., Carson, N., Alberini, A., Flores, N., and Wright, J., A Bibliography of Contingent Valuation Studies and Papers. La Jolla, CA: Natural Resource Damage Assessment, Inc. 1993.Google Scholar
Cochran, W.G. Sampling Techniques. 3rd. ed. John Wiley and Sons. New York, 1977.Google Scholar
Collins, R.C. “Agricultural Land Preservation in a Land Use Planning Perspective.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 31 (1976): 183–89.Google Scholar
Conklin, H.E., and Lesher, W.G. “Farm-Value Assessment as a Means for Reducing Premature and Excessive Agricultural Disinvestment in Urban Fringes.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 59 (1977): 755–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crosson, P. “Agricultural Land: A Question of Values.” Agriculture and Human Values. Fall (1985):l–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillman, D. Mail and Telephone Surveys—The Total Design Method. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1978.Google Scholar
Environment Canada. “World Conservation Strategy—Canada: A Report on Achievements in Conservation.” Pollard, D.F.W. and M.R. McKechnie, preps. Ottawa, May, 1986.Google Scholar
Gardner, B.D. “The Economics of Agricultural Land Preservation.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 59 (1977): 1027–1036.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H. Econometric Analysis. MacMillan Publishing Co., New York. 1990.Google Scholar
Halstead, J.M. “Measuring the Nonmarket Value of Massachusetts Agricultural Land: A Case Study.” Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council 13 (1984): 12–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halstead, J.M., Luloff, A.E., and Stevens, T.H. “Protest Bidders in Contingent Valuation.” Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 21 (1992): 160–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoehn, J.P. “Valuing the Multidimensional Impacts of Environmental Policy: Theory and Methods.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73 (1991): 289–99.Google Scholar
Holmes, T.P., and Kramer, R. “A Contingent Valuation Test of the Prominence Hypothesis.” Paper presented at the W-133 Regional Project, Sante Fe, New Mexico, March 15-16, 1993.Google Scholar
Judge, G.G., Griffiths, W.E., Hill, R.C., Lutkepohl, H., and Lee, T-C. The Theory and Practice of Econometrics 2nd ed. New York: Wiley and Sons, 1985.Google Scholar
Kahnemann, D., and Knetsch, J. “Valuing Public Goods: the Purchase of Moral Satisfaction.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 22 (1992): 57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaMarsh, A. “Personal Communication.” Farm Credit Corporation of Canada, Moncton, NB, 1992.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R.C., and Carson, R.T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 1989.Google Scholar
Reiling, S.D., Boyle, K.J., Cheng, H., and Phillips, M.L., “Contingent Valuation of a Public Program to Control Black Flies.” Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics. 18 (1989): 126–34.Google Scholar
Roberts, R.K., Douglas, P.V., and Park, W.W., “Estimating External Costs of Municipal Landfill Siting Through Contingent Valuation Analysis: A Case Study.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 23 (1991): 155–65.Google Scholar
Walsh, R.G., Loomis, J.B., and Gillman, R.A. “Valuing Option, Existence, and Bequest Demands for Wilderness.” Land Economics 60 (1984): 14–29.Google Scholar
Young, T., and Allen, P.G. “Methods for Valuing Countryside Amenity: An Overview.” Journal of Agricultural Economics 37 (1986): 349–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar