A Multifunctional Approach to Northeastern Agriculture

Economics and Contemporary Land Use Policy: Development and Conservation at the Rural-Urban Fringe

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 205-216

  Batie, Sandra S ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84906105045     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781936331659     Document Type: Chapter

References (39)

1. Aldington, T. J. (1998). Multifunctional Agriculture: A Brief Review from Developed and Developing Country Perspectives. Internal Document 29. November. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Agriculture Department.
2. Barthélemy, D. (2001). Multi-functionality of Agriculture: A European and French Point of View. Seminar paper presented at Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics. November, East Lansing, MI.
3. Batie, S. S. (2001). Public Programs and Conservation on Private Lands. Paper prepared for Private Lands, Public Benefits: A Policy Summit on Working Lands Conservation, National Governors' Association. March, Washington, DC.
4. Batie, S. S. (2003). The Multifunctional Attributes of Northeastern Agriculture: A Research Agenda. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 32(1): 1-8.
5. Blandford, D., and R. N. Boisvert. (2002). Multi-functional Agriculture and Domestic/International Policy Choice. Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy 3(1): 106-118.
6. Bowker, J. M., and D. D. Didychuk. (1994). Estimations of Nonmarket Benefits of Agricultural Land Retention in Eastern Canada. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 23(2): 218-225.
7. Carpenter, J., and L. Lynch. (2002). Is There a Critical Mass of Agricultural Lands Needed to Sustain an Agricultural Economy? Evidence from Six Mid-Atlantic States. Report to the Maryland Center for Agro-Ecology. March. College Park: Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maryland.
8. Claassen, R., L. Hansen, M. Peters, V. Breneman, M. Weinberg, A. Cattaneo, P. Feather, D. Gadsby, D. Hellerstein, J. Hopkins, P. Johnston, M. Morehart, and M. Smith. (2001). Agri-environment Policy at the Crossroads: Guidepost on Changing Landscape. Agricultural Economic Report no. 794. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
9. Deaton, B. J., E. N. Patricia, and J. P. Hoehn. (2003). Setting the Standard for Farmland Preservation: Do Preservation Criteria Motivate Citizen Support for Farmland Preservation? Agriculture and Resource Economics Review October, 272-281.
10. Dimitri, C., and C. Greene. (2002). Recent Growth Patterns in the U.S. Organic Foods Market. Bulletin no. 777. Washington, DC: USDA Economic Research Service.
11. Dobbs, T. L., and J. N. Pretty. (2001a). The United Kingdom's Experience with Agri-environmental Stewardship Schemes: Lessons and Issues for the United States and Europe. Joint Paper 2001-1. March. Brookings: Department of Economics, South Dakota State University; Colchester, England: University of Essex Centre for Environment and Society.
12. Dobbs, T. L., and J. N. Pretty. (2001b). Future Directions for Joint Agricultural-Environmental Policies: Implications of the United Kingdom Experience for Europe and the United States. Research Report 2001-1 and Occasional Paper 2001-5. August. Brookings: South Dakota State University Economic; Colchester, England: University of Essex Centre for Environment and Society.
13. Dunn, J. W. (2002). Personal communication with the author on rural land uses. Department of Agricultural Economics, Pennsylvania State University, June 4.
14. Heimlich, R., and W. D. Anderson. (2001). Development at the Urban Fringe and Beyond: Impacts on Agriculture and Rural Land. Report no. 803. Washington, DC: USDA Economic Research Service.
15. Hellerstein, D., C. Nickerson, J. Cooper, P. Feather, D. Gadsby, D. Mullarkey, A. Tegene, and C. Barnard. (2002). Farmland Protection: The Role of Public Preferences for Rural Amenities. Agricultural Economic Report no. 815. Washington, DC: USDA Economic Research Service.
16. Hollis, L., and W. Fulton. (2002). Open Space Protection: Conservation Meets Growth Management. Discussion paper. April. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.
17. Johnson, B. A., and C. E. Hanrahan. (2004). Green Payments in U.S. and European Union Agricultural Policy. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
18. Josling, T. (2002). Competing Paradigms in the OECD and Their Impact on the WTO Agriculture Talks. In Agricultural Policy for the 21st Century, edited by L. Tweeten and S. R. Thompson. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 245-264.
19. Kleijn, D., and W. J. Sutherland. (2003). How Effective Are European Agri-environment Schemes in Conserving and Promoting Biodiversity? Journal of Applied Ecology 40: 947-969.
20. Kline, J., and D. Wichelns. (1996). Public Preferences and Farmland Preservation Programs. Land Economics 72(4): 538-549.
21. Kline, J., and D. Wichelns. (1998). Measuring Heterogeneous Preferences for Preserving Farmland and Open Space. Ecological Economics 26(1998): 211-224.
22. Lapping, M. B., and M. J. Pfeffer. (1997). City and Country: Forging New Connections through Agriculture. In Visions of American Agriculture, edited by W. Lockerentz. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 91-104.
23. Libby, L. (2002). Farmland Is Not Just for Farming Anymore: The Policy Trends. In Agricultural Policy for the 21st Century, edited by L. Tweeten and S. R. Thompson. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 184-203.
24. Lyson, T. (2000). Moving toward Civic Agriculture. Choices 15(3): 45.
25. Lyson, T. A., R. J. Torres, and R. Welsh. (2001). Scale of Agricultural Production: Civic Engagement and Community Welfare. Social Forces 80(1): 311-327.
26. Moon, W., W. J. Florkowski, B. Brückner, and I. Schonhof. (2002). Willingness to Pay for Environmental Practices: Implications for Eco-Labeling. Land Economics 78(1) 88-102.
27. Myers, P. (1999). Livability at the Ballot Box: State and Local Referenda on Parks, Conservation, and Smarter Growth, Election Day 1998. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.
28. Myers, P. (2001). Growth at the Ballot Box: Electing the Shape of Communities in November 2000. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.
29. Mullarkey, D., J. Cooper, and D. Skully. (2001). Do Mixed Goals Distort Trade? Choices 16(1): 31-34.
30. National Research Council. (2000). Watershed Management for Potable Water Supply: Assessing the New York City Strategy. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31. Nickerson, C. J., and D. Hellerstein. (2003). Protecting Rural Amenities through Farmland Preservation Programs. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 32(1): 129-144.
32. Norris, P. E., and B. J. Deaton. (2002). Public Opinions about Farmland and Farmland Preservation: Results from a Survey in Kent County, Michigan. Staff Paper 2002-10. East Lansing: Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
33. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2001). Multi-functionality towards an Analytical Framework. Paris: OECD Publications.
34. Orden, D., R. Paarlberg, and T. Roe. (1999). Policy Reform in American Agriculture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
35. Peterson, J. M., R. N. Boisvert, H. de Gorter. (1999). Multi-functionality and Optimal Environmental Policies for Agriculture in an Open Economy. Working paper 99-29. Ithaca, NY: Department of Agricultural, Resource and Managerial Economics, Cornell University.
36. Potter, C. (1998). Against the Grain: Agri-environmental Reform in the United States and European Union. New York: CAB International.
37. Potter, C., and P. Goodwin. (1998). Agricultural Liberalization in the European Union: An Analysis of the Implications for Nature Conservation. Journal of Rural Studies 14: 287-298.
38. Schweikhardt, D. B., and W. P. Browne. (2001). Politics by Other Means: The Emergence of a New Politics of Food in the United States. Review of Agricultural Economics 23(2): 302-318.
39. University of California. (2005). Consumers, Commodities, and Communities: Local Food Systems in a Globalizing Environment. Northeast Research Project NE-185. http://sarep.ucdavis.edu/cdpp/foodsystems/countystudies.htm.