The Effects of Farmland, Farmland Preservation, and Other Neighborhood Amenities on Housing Values and Residential Growth

Roe, Brian E.; Irwin, Elena G.; Morrow‐Jones, Hazel A.

doi:10.2307/3147144

Cited by 74 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…He defines permanent farmland as land owned by a farmer who has sold his development rights. Roe et al (2004) are more convinced that it is not the difference between permanent and developable land that explains the pull effect of farmland on household location decisions, but the individual's trade-off between rural amenities and other attributes of housing and location.…”

Section: Economic Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multifunctionality of Agriculture: A Review of Definitions, Evidence and Instruments

Huylenbroeck¹,

Vandermeulen²,

Mettepenningen³

et al. 2007

Living Rev. Landscape Res.

204

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this contribution we try to look at the new role for agriculture in rural areas by reviewing the concept of multifunctional agriculture as well as the analytical frameworks used. Next, we review the existing evidence about the multifunctional role of farming. Although not overwhelming, the existing literature shows that agriculture contributes to the rural wealth not only through the production of commodities, but also by the delivery of non-tradable goods. This contribution can be both direct through increased values for properties or economic benefits in the tourism sector, but also indirect through conservation of rural heritage or agriecological systems. Next we focus on how this role of agriculture can be stimulated. It is argued that multifunctionality can be a unifying principle to bring the productive and non-productive functions into harmony. This requires the development of new institutional arrangements and a major change in policy incentives.

show abstract

Section: Economic Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multifunctionality of Agriculture: A Review of Definitions, Evidence and Instruments

Huylenbroeck¹,

Vandermeulen²,

Mettepenningen³

et al. 2007

Living Rev. Landscape Res.

204

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Irwin & Bockstael (2004) have shown that land conservation policies that aim to preserve landscape and natural amenities, have an indirect side-effect in terms of the development of surrounding parcels of land. These results were also supported by Roe et al (2004) using a conjoint analysis, and Towe (2010) and Geniaux & Napoleone (2011), respectively, studying US and European cases using a propensity score matching method. Consequently, in our approach, AEPs may affect both farming (directly) and urban development (indirectly) and the net effects of AEPs on ecosystems is undetermined.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 63%

Spatial targeting of agri-environmental policy and urban development

Coisnon

Oueslati

Salanié

2014

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Analysts have used SC to quantify preferences and willingness to pay for a variety of market and nonmarket goods and services. In addition to a long history of market research applications, researchers have more recently adapted these techniques to evaluate environmental policies, public health interventions, and pharmaceutical treatments (Brown, Finkelstein, Brown, Buchner, & Johnson, 2009;Bryan, Buxton, Sheldon, & Grant, 1998;Hauber, Mohamed, Johnson, Meddis, Wagner, & O'Dowd, 2009;Johnson & Desvousges, 1997;Johnson, Banzhaf, & Desvousges, 2000;Johnson, Desvousges, Ruby, Stieb, & De Civita, 1998;Johnson, Manjunath, Mansfield, Clayton, Hoerger, & Zhang, 2006;Johnson et al, 2009;Mansfield, Johnson, & Van Houtven, 2006;Mansfield, Phaneuf, Johnson, Yang, & Beach, 2008;Marshall et al, 2009;Roe, Irwin, & Morrow-Jones, 2004;Ryan & Hughes, 1997;Viscusi, Magat, & Huber, 1991;Wittink & Cattin, 1989;Yoo, Kwak, & Lee, 2008). …”

Section: Quantifying Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Brief Introduction to the Use of Stated-Choice Methods to Measure Preferences for Treatment Benefits and Risks

Poulos¹,

Hauber²

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regulatory decisions to approve, restrict development, or halt the marketing of new pharmaceuticals require evaluating the balance between benefits and risks, given the available evidence at a point in time. In response to concerns about how such decisions are reached, there is increasing interest in using patients' perceptions of the benefits of treatment features and their tolerance for possible risks to help inform regulatory decisions. Stated-choice methods, which measure stated preferences and are sometimes called discrete-choice experiments or conjoint analysis, are often the most valid and reliable techniques available for quantifying patient preferences because data on actual choices are limited. This introduction discusses how to adapt and apply stated-choice methods to quantitative benefit-risk analysis. We outline the conceptual framework for measuring patient preferences and the requirements for developing and administering a valid survey instrument. We also provide a numerical example illustrating how stated-choice data can be used to quantify benefit-risk tradeoff preferences. Finally, we discuss some limitations and practical considerations involving its use for regulatory and clinical decision making.

show abstract

The Effects of Farmland, Farmland Preservation, and Other Neighborhood Amenities on Housing Values and Residential Growth

Cited by 74 publications

References 1 publication

Multifunctionality of Agriculture: A Review of Definitions, Evidence and Instruments

Multifunctionality of Agriculture: A Review of Definitions, Evidence and Instruments

Spatial targeting of agri-environmental policy and urban development

A Brief Introduction to the Use of Stated-Choice Methods to Measure Preferences for Treatment Benefits and Risks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About