IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v68y2009i6p1893-1898.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental amenities and optimal agricultural land use: The case of Israel

Author

Listed:
  • Kan, Iddo
  • Haim, David
  • Rapaport-Rom, Mickey
  • Shechter, Mordechai

Abstract

This paper evaluates the effectiveness of changing land allocation among crops as a mechanism for increasing net-social benefits, where production profits and amenity values are augmented. A positive mathematical programming model is calibrated and applied to 43 regions in the northern part of Israel, using a crop-discriminating amenity-value function. Changes in land allocation increase net-social benefits by 2.4% nationwide and by up to 15% on the regional level, where in some regions the net-social-benefits-increase/profit-loss ratio exceeds 20. Therefore, the results indicate that a policy encouraging amenity-enhancement of agricultural land use is warranted, provided that it is implemented on a regional scale, rather than as a comprehensive nationwide-enforced program.

Suggested Citation

  • Kan, Iddo & Haim, David & Rapaport-Rom, Mickey & Shechter, Mordechai, 2009. "Environmental amenities and optimal agricultural land use: The case of Israel," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1893-1898, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:68:y:2009:i:6:p:1893-1898
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(09)00028-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aliza Fleischer & Yacov Tsur, 2009. "The Amenity Value of Agricultural Landscape and Rural–Urban Land Allocation," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 132-153, February.
    2. Richard E. Howitt, 1995. "Positive Mathematical Programming," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(2), pages 329-342.
    3. Rolf Jens Brunstad & Ivar Gaasland & Erling Vårdal, 1999. "Agricultural Production and the Optimal Level of Landscape Preservation (," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(4), pages 538-546.
    4. Drake, Lars, 1992. "The Non-market Value of the Swedish Agricultural Landscape," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 19(3), pages 351-364.
    5. Robert J. Johnston & Joshua M. Duke, 2007. "Willingness to Pay for Agricultural Land Preservation and Policy Process Attributes: Does the Method Matter?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(4), pages 1098-1115.
    6. Jeffrey M. Peterson & Richard N. Boisvert & Harry de Gorter, 2002. "Environmental policies for a multifunctional agricultural sector in open economies," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 29(4), pages 423-443, December.
    7. Douglas J. Miller & Andrew J. Plantinga, 1999. "Modeling Land Use Decisions with Aggregate Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(1), pages 180-194.
    8. Bergstrom, John C. & Dillman, B. L. & Stoll, John R., 1985. "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land: The Case of Prime Agricultural Land," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 139-149, July.
    9. Rigoberto A. Lopez & Farhed A. Shah & Marilyn A. Altobello, 1994. "Amenity Benefits and the Optimal Allocation of Land," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(1), pages 53-62.
    10. Crane, Randall, 2007. "Is There a Quiet Revolution in Women's Travel? Revisiting the Gender Gap in Commuting," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt8nj9n8nb, University of California Transportation Center.
    11. Aliza Fleischer & Yacov Tsur, 2003. "Measuring the Recreational Value of Open Space," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 269-283, July.
    12. Franz Hackl & Gerald Pruckner, 1997. "Towards More Efficient Compensation Programmes for Tourists' Benefits From Agriculture in Europe," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 189-205, September.
    13. Bowker, James Michael & Didychuk, D.D., 1994. "Estimation Of The Nonmarket Benefits Of Agricultural Land Retention In Eastern Canada," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 23(2), pages 1-8, October.
    14. Richard C. Ready & Charles W. Abdalla, 2005. "The Amenity and Disamenity Impacts of Agriculture: Estimates from a Hedonic Pricing Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 314-326.
    15. McConnell, Kenneth E., 1989. "The Optimal Quantity Of Land In Agriculture," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 18(2), pages 1-10, October.
    16. JunJie Wu & Kathleen Segerson, 1995. "The Impact of Policies and Land Characteristics on Potential Groundwater Pollution in Wisconsin," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(4), pages 1033-1047.
    17. Bowker, J.M. & Didychuk, D.D., 1994. "Estimation of the Nonmarket Benefits of Agricultural Land Retention in Eastern Canada," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 218-225, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kimhi, A., 2018. "Integrated Micro-Macro Structural Econometric Framework for Assessing Climate-Change Impacts on Agricultural Production and Food Markets," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 276972, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Sande, Doris N. & Mullen, Jeffrey D. & Nzaku, Kilungu, 2009. "Amenity benefits and public policy: An application to the Georgia Pecan Industry," 2009 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2009, Atlanta, Georgia 46851, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    3. Yerushalmi, Erez, 2012. "Measuring the administrative water allocation mechanism and agricultural amenities," Economic Research Papers 270633, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    4. Yerushalmi, Erez, 2018. "Using Water Allocation in Israel as a Proxy for Imputing the Value of Agricultural Amenities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 12-20.
    5. Zvi Baum & Ruslana Rachel Palatnik & Iddo Kan & Mickey Rapaport-Rom, 2016. "Economic Impacts of Water Scarcity Under Diverse Water Salinities," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(01), pages 1-22, March.
    6. Roberto Ponce & María Blanco & Carlo Giupponi, 2014. "Climate Change, Water Scarcity in Agriculture and the Country-Level Economic Impacts. A Multimarket Analysis," Serie Working Papers 02, Universidad del Desarrollo, School of Business and Economics, revised Nov 2014.
    7. Kan, Iddo & Kimhi, Ayal & Kaminski, Jonathan, 2015. "Climate-Change Impacts on Agriculture and Food Markets: Combining a Micro-Level Structural Land-Use Model and a Market-Level Equilibrium Model," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205128, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Xin Yang & Anlu Zhang & Fan Zhang, 2019. "Farmers’ Heterogeneous Willingness to Pay for Farmland Non-Market Goods and Services on the Basis of a Mixed Logit Model—A Case Study of Wuhan, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-14, October.
    9. Kan, Iddo & Reznik, Ami & Kaminski, Jonathan & Kimhi, Ayal, 2023. "The impacts of climate change on cropland allocation, crop production, output prices and social welfare in Israel: A structural econometric framework," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    10. Rotem Zelingher & Andrea Ghermandi & Enrica Cian & Malcolm Mistry & Iddo Kan, 2019. "Economic Impacts of Climate Change on Vegetative Agriculture Markets in Israel," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(2), pages 679-696, October.
    11. Palatnik, Ruslana Rachel & Baum, Zvi & Kan, Iddo & Rapaport-Rom, Mickey, 2016. "Economic Impacts of Water Scarcity under Diverse Water Salinities," Conference papers 330173, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    12. Ruslana Rachel Palatnik & Paulo Augusto Lourenço Dias Nunes, 2015. "Economic valuation of climate change-induced biodiversity impacts on agriculture: results from a macro-economic application to the Mediterranean basin," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 45-63, March.
    13. Bar-Nahum, Ziv & Reznik, Ami & Finkelshtain, Israel & Kan, Iddo, 2022. "Centralized water management under lobbying: Economic analysis of desalination in Israel," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aliza Fleischer & Yacov Tsur, 2009. "The Amenity Value of Agricultural Landscape and Rural–Urban Land Allocation," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 132-153, February.
    2. Mara Thiene & Yacov Tsur, 2013. "Agricultural Landscape Value and Irrigation Water Policy," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 641-653, September.
    3. Sande, Doris N. & Mullen, Jeffrey D. & Nzaku, Kilungu, 2009. "Amenity benefits and public policy: An application to the Georgia Pecan Industry," 2009 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2009, Atlanta, Georgia 46851, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    4. Yerushalmi, Erez, 2018. "Using Water Allocation in Israel as a Proxy for Imputing the Value of Agricultural Amenities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 12-20.
    5. Yerushalmi, Erez, 2012. "Measuring the administrative water allocation mechanism and agricultural amenities," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 992, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    6. John C. Bergstrom & Richard C. Ready, 2009. "What Have We Learned from Over 20 Years of Farmland Amenity Valuation Research in North America?," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(1), pages 21-49.
    7. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2009. "Economics at the Fringe: Non-Market Valuation Studies and their Role in Land Use Plans in the United States," MPRA Paper 101193, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Lovell, Sabrina J. & Lynch, Lori, 2002. "Hedonic Price Analysis Of Easement Payments In Agricultural Land Preservation Programs," Working Papers 28564, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    9. Lori Lynch & Wesley N. Musser, 2001. "A Relative Efficiency Analysis of Farmland Preservation Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 577-594.
    10. Bergstrom, John, 1999. "Exploring and Expanding the Landscape Values Terrain," Western Region Archives 321704, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    11. Joshua Duke & Lori Lynch, 2007. "Gauging support for innovative farmland preservation techniques," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 40(2), pages 123-155, June.
    12. Bergstrom, John C., 1998. "Exploring And Expanding The Landscape Values Terrain," Faculty Series 16653, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    13. Lynch, Lori & Duke, Joshua M., 2007. "Economic Benefits of Farmland Preservation: Evidence from the United States," Working Papers 7342, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    14. Bockarjova, Marija & Botzen, Wouter J.W. & Koetse, Mark J., 2020. "Economic valuation of green and blue nature in cities: A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    15. Rolf Jens Brunstad & Ivar Gaasland & Erling Vardal, 2005. "Multifunctionality of agriculture: an inquiry into the complementarity between landscape preservation and food security," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(4), pages 469-488, December.
    16. Rosenberger, Randall S. & Walsh, Richard G., 1997. "Nonmarket Value Of Western Valley Ranchland Using Contingent Valuation," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(2), pages 1-14, December.
    17. Duke, Joshua M. & Johnston, Robert J., 2006. "Systematic Influences of Policy Implementation and Conservation Agents on Willingness to Pay for Land Preservation," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21234, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    18. Peterson, Jeffrey M. & Boisvert, Richard N. & de Gorter, Harry, 1999. "Multifunctionality and Optimal Environmental Policies for Agriculture in an Open Economy," Working Papers 127701, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    19. Werner Hediger, 2003. "Alternative policy measures and farmers' participation to improve rural landscapes and water quality: A conceptual framework," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 139(III), pages 333-350, September.
    20. Bergstrom, John C., 2001. "Postproductivism And Rural Land Values," Faculty Series 16689, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agriculture Land-use Amenities Positive-mathematical-programming;

    JEL classification:

    • Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General
    • Q24 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Land
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:68:y:2009:i:6:p:1893-1898. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.