Postproductivism And Rural Land Values
AbstractThere are a multitude of interdisciplinary values that people derive from rural land. Productivism focuses on the commodity values of rural land, such as the use of land as a commercial input into agricultural production, timber harvesting and mineral extraction. Productivistic uses and values of rural land have been the traditional focus of rural land policy and management in the United States. Many rural areas in the United States are moving into a postproductivism era. Postproductivism focuses on both commodity and amenity values of rural land. Amenity values of rural land include recreational, aesthetic and ecological service values. When a rural area moves from productivism to postproductivism, value conflicts may arise between individuals and groups who have different preferences with respect to commodity and amenity values. Traditional rural institutions may not be set up to effectively handle such conflicts. There is a need to explore what types of institutions may be most effective in resolving rural land use problems related to the different and often competing values people place on rural land and landscapes.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics in its series Faculty Series with number 16689.
Date of creation: 2001
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Conner Hall, Athens, GA 30602
Phone: (706) 542-2481
Fax: (706) 542-0739
Web page: http://www.caes.uga.edu/departments/agecon/index.html
More information through EDIRC
postproductivism; rural land values and preferences; commodity values; amenity values; Land Economics/Use;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- 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(02), December.
- Mark R. Correll & Jane H. Lillydahl & Larry D. Singell, 1978. "The Effects of Greenbelts on Residential Property Values: Some Findings on the Political Economy of Open Space," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 54(2), pages 207-217.
- Hite, James C. & Dillman, B.L., 1981. "Protection Of Agricultural Land: An Institutionalist Perspective," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 13(01), July.
- Pierre Crosson, 1985. "Agricultural land: A question of values," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 6-13, September.
- Bergstrom, John C. & Dillman, B.L. & Stoll, John R., 1985. "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits Of Private Land: The Case Of Prime Agricultural Land," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(01), July.
- 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), October.
- Bromley, Daniel W & Hodge, Ian, 1990. "Private Property Rights and Presumptive Policy Entitlements: Reconsidering the Premises of Rural Policy," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 17(2), pages 197-214.
- Jeffrey Kline & Dennis Wichelns, 1996. "Public Preferences Regarding the Goals of Farmland Preservation Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(4), pages 538-549.
- Halstead, John M., 1984. "Measuring the Nonmarket Value of Massachusetts Agricultural Land: A Case Study," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 13(1:), April.
- Chang-Moo Lee & Peter Linneman, 1998. "Dynamics of the Greenbelt Amenity Effect on the Land Market-The Case of Seoul's Greenbelt," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 107-129.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.