Landscape economic valuation by integrating landscape ecology into landscape economics

Environmental Science and Policy

Volumn 32, Issue , 2013, Pages 26-36

  Tagliafierro, Carolina ^a   Longo, Alberto ^a   Van Eetvelde, Veerle ^b   Antrop, Marc ^b   Hutchinson, W George ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

^b GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Choice Experiments; Geographical information systems; Landscape ecology; Landscape economic valuation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ECOLOGY; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; FRUIT; LANDSCAPE; LEMON; OLIVE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCIENTIST; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; URBAN AREA; WOOD;

EID: 84878924641     PISSN: 14629011     EISSN: 18736416     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2012.12.001     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Adamowicz W., Boxall P., Williams M., Louviere J. Stated preferences approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1998, 80:64-75.
2. Antrop M. The concept of traditional landscapes as a base for landscape evaluation and planning. The example of Flanders region. Landscape and Urban Planning 1997, 38(1-2):105-117.
3. Antrop M. Sustainable landscapes: contradiction, fiction or utopia?. Landscape and Urban Planning 2006, 75:187-197.
4. Antrop M., Van Eetvelde V. Holistic aspects of suburban landscapes: visual image interpretation and landscape metrics. Landscape and Urban Planning 2000, 50(1-3):43-58.
5. Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P.R., Leamer E.E., Radner R., Schuman H. Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Federal Register 1993, 58(10.):4601-4614. (retrieved 05.07.10). http://www.darp.noaa.gov/library/pdf/cvblue.pdf.
6. Bastian C.T., McLeod D.M., Germino M.J., Reiners W.A., Blasko B.J. Environmental amenities and agricultural land values: a hedonic model using geographic information systems data. Ecological Economics 2002, 40:337-349.
7. Bateman I.J., Jones A.P., Lovett A.A., Lake I.R., Day B.H. Applying geographical information system (GIS) to environmental and resource economics. Environmental and Resource Economics 2002, 22:219-269.
8. Bell K.P., Irwin E.G. Spatially explicit micro-level modelling of land use change at the rural-urban interface. Agricultural Economics 2002, 27:217-232.
9. Botequilha Leitǎo A., Ahern J. Applying landscape ecological concepts and metrics in sustainable landscape planning. Landscape and Urban Planning 2002, 59:65-93.
10. Brown T.C., Bergstrom J.C., Loomis J.B. Defining, valuing, and providing ecosystem goods and services. Natural Resources Journal 2007, 47:329-376.
11. Campbell D. Willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements: combining Mixed Logit and Random-Effects models. Journal of Agricultural Economics 2007, 58(3):467-483.
12. Carson R.T. Contingent valuation: a user's guide. Environmental Science & Technology 2000, 34:1413-1418.
13. Ciriacy-Wantrup S.V. Capital returns from soil-conservation practices. Journal of Farm Economics 1947, 29:1188-1190.
14. Council of Europe, 2000. European Landscape Convention. ETS 176. (retrieved 21.07.07). http://www.coe.int/t/e/cultural_co-operation/environment/landscape/.
15. Council of Europe, UNEP & ECNC, 1995. Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy. (retrieved 21.07.07). http://www.landscape-europe.net/peblds.html.
16. Dramstad W.E., Sundli Tveit M., Fjellstad W.J., Fry G.L.A. Relationships between visual landscape preferences and map-based indicators of landscape structure. Landscape and Urban Planning 2006, 78:465-474.
17. Agricultural impacts on landscapes: Developing indicators for policy analysis. NIJOS Report 7. Proceedings from the NIJOS/OECD Expert Meeting on Agricultural Landscape Indicators 2003, W. Dramstad, C. Sogge (Eds.).
18. European Environment Agency, 2005. Market-based Instruments for Environmental Policy in Europe. EEA Technical Report No. 8/2005. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. ISSN 1725-2237.
19. European Environment Agency (2006). Using the market for cost-effective environmental policy. EEA Report No. 1/2006. ISSN 1725-9177, Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
20. Forman R.T.T. Land Mosaics. The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions 1995, Cambridge University Press, UK.
21. Franco D., Franco D., Mannino I., Zanetto G. The impact of agroforestry networks on scenic beauty estimation. The role of a landscape ecological network on a socio-cultural process. Landscape and Urban Planning 2003, 62:119-138.
22. Freeman A.M. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values. Theory and Methods 2003, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC. Second ed.
23. Geoghegan J., Wainger L., Bockstael N. Spatial landscape indices in a hedonic framework: an ecological economics analysis using GIS. Ecological Economics 1997, 23:251-264.
24. Gonzalez L., Leòn C.J. Consumption process and multiple valuation of landscape attributes. Ecological Economics 2003, 45:159-169.
25. Grabaum R., Meyer B.C. Multicriteria optimisation of landscapes using GIS-based functional assessments. Landscape and Urban Planning 1998, 43:21-34.
26. Gulink H., Mugica M., de Lucio J.V., Atauri J.A. A framework for comparative landscape analysis and evaluation based on land cover data, with an application in the Madrid region, Spain. Landscape and Urban Planning 2001, 55:257-270.
27. Haab T.C., McConnell K.E. Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources. The Econometrics of Non-Market Valuation. New Horizons in Environmental Economics 2002, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK.
28. Hair J.F., Anderson R.E., Tatham R.L., Black W.C. Multivariate Data Analysis 1998, Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Fifth ed.
29. Hanemann M.W. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1984, 66:332-341.
30. Hanemann W.M. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 1994, 8(4):19-43.
31. Hensher D.A., Rose J.M., Greene W.H. Applied Choice Analysis. A Primer 2005, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
32. Hoyos D. The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments. Ecological Economics 2010, 69(8):1595-1603.
33. Irwin G.E. The effects of open space on residential property values. Land Economics 2002, 78:465-480.
34. Isaia M., Caprio E., Van Eetvelde V., Badino G. Landscape characterisation at the local scale using cluster analysis and GIS, a case study in NW-Italy. N.N. Landscapes, Identities and Development. 23rd Session of the Permanent European Conference for the Study of the Rural Landscape 2008, 76.
35. Kong F., Yin H., Nagakoshi N. Using GIS and landscape metrics in the hedonic price modeling of the amenity value of urban green space: a case study in Jinan City, China. Landscape and Urban Planning 2007, 79:240-252.
36. Longley P.A., Goodchild M.F., Maguire D.J., Rhind D.W. Geographic Information Systems and Science 2005, John Wiley and Sons Ltd., England.
37. Louviere J.J., Hensher D.A., Swait J.D. Stated Choice Methods. Analysis and Applications 2000, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
38. Mazzoleni S., Di Martino P., Strumia S., Buonanno M., Bellelli M. Recent changes of coastal and sub-mountain vegetation landscape in Campania and Molise Regions in Southern Italy. Recent Dynamics of the Mediterranean Vegetation and Landscape 2004, John Wiley and Sons Ltd. S. Mazzoleni, G. di Pasquale, M. Mulligan, P. di Martino, F. Rego (Eds.).
39. McFadden D. Conditional Logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Frontiers in Econometrics 1974, 105-142. Academic Press, New York. P. Zarembka (Ed.).
40. McGarigal K., Cushman S.A., Neel M.C., Ene E. FRAGSTATS: Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for Categorical Maps 2002, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
41. Mitchell R.C., Carson R.T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Resource for the Future 1989, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
42. Moss M.R. Interdisciplinarity, landscape ecology and the 'transformation of agricultural landscapes'. Landscape Ecology 2000, 15(3):303-311.
43. Ode A., Fry G., Tveit M., Messager P., Miller D. Indicators of perceived naturalness as drivers of landscape preferences. Journal of Environmental Management 2009, 90(1):375-383.
44. Ode A., Tveit M.S., Fry G. Capturing landscape visual character using indicators: touching base with landscape aesthetic theory. Landscape Research 2008, 33(1):89-117.
45. Palang H., Alumäe H., Mander ü. Holistic aspects in landscape development: a scenario approach. Landscape and Urban Planning 2000, 50:85-94.
46. Palmer J.F. Using spatial metrics to predict scenic perception in a changing landscape: Dennis, Massachusetts. Landscape and Urban Planning 2004, 69:201-218.
47. Pearce D.W., Turner R.K. Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment 1990, The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
48. Portney P.R. The contingent valuation debate: why economists should care. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1994, 8(4):3-17.
49. Potschin M.B., Haines-Young R.H. Landscapes and sustainability. Landscape and Urban Planning 2006, 75(3-4):155-161.
50. Price C. Editorial. Landscape Research 1994, 19(1):1-2.
51. Randall A. Contingent valuation: an introduction. Landscape Research 1994, 19(1):12-14.
52. Sándor Z., Wedel M. Profile construction in experimental choice designs for Mixed Logit models. Marketing Science 2002, 21(4):455-475.
53. Santos J.M. Valuing alternative bundles of landscape attributes: cost-benefit analysis for the selection of optimal landscapes. Environmental Valuation 1999, vol. II. Edward Elgar Publishing Inc., USA.
54. Sevenant M., Antrop M. Transdisciplinary landscape planning: does the public have aspirations? Experiences from a case study in Ghent (Flanders, Belgium). Land Use Policy 2010, 27:373-386.
55. Sevenant M., Antrop M. The use of latent classes to identify individual differences in the importance of landscape dimensions for aesthetic preference. Land Use Policy 2010, 27(3):827-842.
56. Soini K. Exploring human dimensions of multifunctional landscapes through mapping and map-making. Landscape and Urban Planning 2001, 57:225-239.
57. Europe's Environment. The Dobris Assessment 1995, European Environment Agency, EC DG XI and Phare, Copenhagen. D. Stanners, P. Bourdeau (Eds.).
58. Tagliafierro, C., 2012. An Integrated Approach to Landscape Economic Valuation. Ph.D. Thesis. Queen's University of Belfast, UK.
59. Tress G., Tress B., Fry G. Analysis of the barriers to integration in landscape research projects. Land Use Policy 2007, 24:374-385.
60. Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Landscape Studies: Potential and Limitations 2003, Delta, Wageningen. B. Tress, G. Tress, A. van der Valk, G. Fry (Eds.).
61. Tveit M.S. Indicators of visual scale as predictors of landscape preference: a comparison between groups. Journal of Environmental Management 2009, 90(9):2882-2888.
62. Tveit M.S., Ode å., Fry G. Key concepts in a framework for analysing visual landscape character. Landscape Research 2006, 31:229-255.
63. Vatn A. Environmental Valuation and Rationality. Land Economics 2004, 80(1):1-18.
64. Van Eetvelde V., Antrop M. A stepwise multi-scaled landscape typology and characterization for trans-regional integration, applied on the federal state of Belgium. Landscape and Urban Planning 2009, 91(3):160-170.
65. Veisten K. Contingent valuation controversies: philosophic debates about economic theory. The Journal of Socio-Economics 2007, 36:204-232.
66. Wascher D.M. Landscape-indicator development: steps towards a European approach. The New Dimensions of the European Landscape 2004, 237-252. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. R. Jongman (Ed.).
67. Zonneveld I.S. Basic principles of classification. Ecosystem Classification for Environmental Management 1994, 23-47. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, London. F. Klijn (Ed.).