Estimating the welfare impacts of agricultural landscape change in Ireland: A choice experiment approach

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

Volumn 54, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 1019-1039

  Hynes, Stephen ^a   Campbell, Danny ^b  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND   (Ireland)

^b QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Choice experiments; Environmental preferences; Future farm landscapes; Random parameter logit

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL LAND; AGRICULTURAL POLICY; BIODIVERSITY; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; LAND USE CHANGE; LANDSCAPE CHANGE; LOGIT ANALYSIS; POLICY REFORM; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; RURAL LANDSCAPE; WELFARE IMPACT;

IRELAND;

EID: 84858274889     PISSN: 09640568     EISSN: 13600559     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2010.547691     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Adamowicz, W., et al., 1998. Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation. American journal of agricultural economics, 80 (1), 64-75.
2. Bennett, J. and Adamowicz, V., 2001. Some fundamentals of environmental choice modelling. In: J. Bennett and R. Blamey, eds. The choice modelling approach to environmental valuation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 37-69.
3. Blandford, D. and Hill, B., 2010. Improving the evaluation of rural development policy. Paper presented. In: Joint AES and SFER conference on The Common Agricultural Policy post-2013. Edinburgh, 29 March.
4. Brownstone, D. and Train, K., 1999. Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns. Journal of econometrics, 89, 109-129.
5. Buckley, C., et al., 2009. Walking in the Irish countryside - landowners attitudes to improved public access provision. Journal of environmental planning and management, 52 (8), 1053-1070.
6. Burrell, A.M., 2004. The 2003 CAP reform: implications for the EU dairy sector. Outlook on agriculture, 33 (1), 15-26.
7. Campbell, D., 2008. Identification and analysis of discontinuous preferences in discrete choice experiments. European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists 16th annual conference, Gothenburg, June.
8. Campbell, D., Hutchinson, W.G., and Scarpa, R., 2006. Quantifying the landscape benefits arising from the Rural Environment Protection Scheme: results from a public survey. Tearmann: Irish journal of agri-environmental research, 4 (1), 14-29.
9. Colombo, S., Hanley, N., and Louviere, J., 2009. Modeling preference heterogeneity in stated choice data: an analysis for public goods generated by agriculture. Agricultural economics, 40, 307-322.
10. Commission of the European Communities, 2009. Guidelines on the mid-term evaluation of the rural development programmers. European Evaluation Network in Rural Development. DG Agriculture and Rural Development.
11. Cribb, J., 2008. The coming famine. Constraints to global food production in an overpopulated, affluent and resource-scarce world: the scientific challenge of the era. An Australian Science Media Centre publication. [online] Available from: http://www.aussmc.org/documents/Worldfood2050.pdf [Accessed 2 December 2009].
12. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, 2009. Fact sheet on Irish agriculture. [online] Available from: http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/media/migration/publications/2009/Fact%20Sheet%20on%20Irish%20Agriculture%20Dec%202009.pdf [Accessed 24 August 2010].
13. Dillon, E.J., Hennessy, T., and Hynes, S., 2010. Assessing the sustainability of Irish agriculture. International journal of agricultural sustainability, 8 (3), 131-147.
14. Dixon, J. and Matthews, A., 2007. The 2003 mid-term review of the Common Agricultural Policy: a computable general equilibrium analysis for Ireland. Journal of international agriculture and development, 3 (1), 71-85.
15. Drake, L., 1992. The non-market value of agricultural landscape. European review of agricultural economics, 19 (3), 351-364.
16. FAO, 2006. World agriculture towards 2030/2050. Rome: FAO.
17. FAPRI, 2004. FAPRI 2004 U.S. and World Agricultural Outlook, No 32046, Staff Reports. Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute.
18. Ferrini, S. and Scarpa, R., 2007. Designs with a priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice experiments: a Monte Carlo study. Journal of environmental economics and management, 53, 342-363.
19. Flanagan, J., et al., 2008. 'The 5 scenarios' Teagasc Foresight Report. [online] Available from: http://www.teagasc.ie/publications/2008/20080609/ForesightReportVol2.pdf [Accessed 15 July 2010].
20. Hanemann, W., 1984. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiment with discrete responses. American journal of agricultural economics, 66 (2), 332-341.
21. Hanley, N., et al., 1998. Contingent valuation versus choice experiments: estimating the benefits of environmentally sensitive areas in Scotland. Journal of agricultural economics, 49 (1), 1-15.
22. Hanley, N., et al., 2001. Estimating the value of environmental features. Report to MAFF by the Institute of Ecology and Resource Management (IERM). Edinburgh: University Edinburgh and Scottish Agricultural College (SAC).
23. Hanley, N., et al., 2007. The reform of support mechanisms for upland farming: paying for public goods in the severely disadvantaged areas of England. Journal of agricultural economics, 58 (3), 433-453.
24. Harvey, D., 2010. On the future of direct payments: CAP bond revisited. In: Proceedings of the Agricultural Economics Society of Ireland annual conference. Ashtown Conference Centre, Dublin, 14 October.
25. Hensher, D., Rose, J., and Greene, W., 2005. The implications on willingness to pay of respondents ignoring specific attributes. Transportation, 32, 203-222.
26. Hunziker, M., et al., 2008. Evaluation of landscape change by different social groups: results of two empirical studies in Switzerland. Mountain research and development, 28 (2), 140-147.
27. Hynes, S., Hanley, N., and Scarpa, R., 2008. Effects on welfare measures of alternative means of accounting for preference heterogeneity in recreational demand models. American journal of agricultural economics, 90 (4), 1011-1027.
28. Hynes, S., et al., 2009a. Building a static farm level spatial microsimulation model for rural development and agricultural policy analysis in Ireland. International journal of agricultural resources, governance and ecology, 8 (3), 282-299.
29. Hynes, S., et al., 2009b. A spatial microsimulation analysis of methane emissions from Irish agriculture. Journal of ecological complexity, 6, 135-146.
30. Irish Committee on Climate Change, 2008. Second scientific statement on climate change and Irish agriculture. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy.
31. Louviere, J., Hensher, D., and Swait, J., 2000. Stated choice methods, analysis and application. Cambridge University Press.
32. McFadden, D., 1974. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour. In: P. Zarembka, ed. Frontiers in econometrics. New York: Academic Press, 105-142.
33. McFadden, D. and Train, K., 2000. Mixed MNL models of discrete response. Journal of applied economics, 15, 447-470.
34. Rambonilaza, M. and Dachary-Bernard, J., 2007. Land-use planning and public preferences: what can we learn from choice experiment method? Landscape and urban planning, 83 (4), 318-326.
35. Raymond, C. and Brown, G., 2006. A method for assessing protected area allocations using a typology of landscape values. Journal of environmental planning and management, 49 (6), 797-812.
36. Rigby, D. and Burton, M., 2003. Capturing preference heterogeneity in stated choice models: a random parameter logit model of the demand for GM food. The University of Manchester, School of Economic Studies Discussion Paper Series, Number 0319.
37. Rose, J., et al., 2008. Designing efficient stated choice experiments in the presence of reference alternatives. Transportation research part B, 42, 395-406.
38. Scarpa, R. and Rose, J., 2008. Design efficiency for choice modelling. Australian journal of agricultural and resource economics, 52 (3), 253-282.
39. Schmitz, K., Schmitz, M., and Wronka, T., 2003. Valuation of landscape functions using choice experiments. Agrarwirtschaft, 52 (8), 379-389.
40. Skerratt, S. and Slee, B., 2010. Rural development after 2013 - A Scottish perspective. Paper presented at a Joint AES and SFER Conference on The Common Agricultural Policy Post-2013. Edinburgh, 29 March.
41. Swinnen, J., 2009. On the future of direct payments. Paper presented at the. BEPA Workshop. European Commission, Brussels, 2 February.
42. Train, K., 1998. Recreation demand models with taste differences over people. Land economics, 74, 230-239.
43. Train, K., 2003. Discrete choice methods with simulations. Cambridge University Press.
44. Variyam, J., Jorday, J., and Epperson, J., 1990. Preferences of citizens for agricultural policies: evidence from a national survey. American journal of agricultural economics, 72 (1), 257-267.
45. Willis, K.G. and Garrod, G.D., 1993. Valuing landscape: a contingent valuation approach. Journal of environmental management, 37, 1-22.
46. Willis, K.G., Garrod, G.D., and Saunders, C., 1995. Benefits of environmentally sensitive area policy in England: a contingent valuation assessment. Journal of environmental management, 44, 105-125.
47. World Bank, 2008. Annual world development report. New York: World Bank.