IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/acb/agenda/v22y2015i1p45-62.html

The Australian Public's Preferences Over Foreign Investment in Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • James Laurenceson
  • Paul F. Burke
  • Edward Wei

Abstract

This paper estimates a model of how the Australian public's preferences over foreign investment in agriculture are determined. The results show that the attributes of foreign investment of greatest concern to the public are not the same as those used by the foreign investment approvals regime to flag proposals for scrutiny.

Suggested Citation

  • James Laurenceson & Paul F. Burke & Edward Wei, 2015. "The Australian Public's Preferences Over Foreign Investment in Agriculture," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 22(1), pages 45-62.
    • Handle: RePEc:acb:agenda:v:22:y:2015:i:1:p:45-62
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p332753/pdf/analysis03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, Enero-Abr.
    2. Lancsar, Emily & Louviere, Jordan & Donaldson, Cam & Currie, Gillian & Burgess, Leonie, 2013. "Best worst discrete choice experiments in health: Methods and an application," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 74-82.
    3. Flynn, Terry Nicholas & Louviere, Jordan J. & Peters, Tim J. & Coast, Joanna, 2010. "Using discrete choice experiments to understand preferences for quality of life. Variance-scale heterogeneity matters," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 1957-1965, June.
    4. Carson, Richard T. & Louviere, Jordan J. & Wei, Edward, 2010. "Alternative Australian climate change plans: The public's views," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 902-911, February.
    5. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, November.
    6. Peter Drysdale, 2011. "A New Look at Chinese FDI in Australia," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 19(4), pages 54-73, July.
    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. Johnson, Jane & Howard, Kirsten & Wilson, Andrew & Ward, Michael & Gilbert, Gwendolyn L. & Degeling, Chris, 2019. "Public preferences for One Health approaches to emerging infectious diseases: A discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 164-171.
    2. Dumbrell, Nikki P. & Wheeler, Sarah Ann & Zuo, Alec & Adamson, David, 2024. "Comparing Australian public and farmer views on agricultural land use and management practices for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(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. Emily Lancsar & Peter Burge, 2014. "Choice modelling research in health economics," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 28, pages 675-687, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. T.N. Flynn & A.A.J. Marley, 2014. "Best-worst scaling: theory and methods," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 8, pages 178-201, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Caroline M. Vass & Stuart Wright & Michael Burton & Katherine Payne, 2018. "Scale Heterogeneity in Healthcare Discrete Choice Experiments: A Primer," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(2), pages 167-173, April.
    4. Martin, Inès & Vranken, Liesbet & Ugás, Roberto, 2021. "Farmers’ Preferences to Cultivate Threatened Crop Varieties: Evidence from Peru," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315216, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Kwak, Kyuseop & Wang, Paul & Louviere, Jordan J., 2016. "A novel approach to detect attribute by covariate interactions in discrete choice models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 42-47.
    6. Kaambwa, Billingsley & Lancsar, Emily & McCaffrey, Nicola & Chen, Gang & Gill, Liz & Cameron, Ian D. & Crotty, Maria & Ratcliffe, Julie, 2015. "Investigating consumers' and informal carers' views and preferences for consumer directed care: A discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 81-94.
    7. Balbontin, C. & Ortúzar, J. de D. & Swait, J.D., 2015. "A joint best–worst scaling and stated choice model considering observed and unobserved heterogeneity: An application to residential location choice," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 1-14.
    8. Mesfin G. Genie & Nicolas Krucien & Mandy Ryan, 2021. "Weighting or aggregating? Investigating information processing in multi‐attribute choices," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1291-1305, June.
    9. Alessandro Mengoni & Chiara Seghieri & Sabina Nuti, 2013. "The application of discrete choice experiments in health economics: a systematic review of the literature," Working Papers 201301, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa, Istituto di Management.
    10. Sadhukhan, Shubhajit & Banerjee, Uttam K. & Maitra, Bhargab, 2017. "Rationality of fare increment for improvement of transfer facilities at metro stations: An experience in Kolkata," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 31-38.
    11. Veisten, Knut & Flügel, Stefan & Rizzi, Luis I. & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Elvik, Rune, 2013. "Valuing casualty risk reductions from estimated baseline risk," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 50-61.
    12. Reich, Charlotte-Elena & Musshoff, Oliver, 2022. "Oil Palm Smallholders Preferences towards Certification Schemes -A Discrete Choice Experiment in Indonesia," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322371, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Huang, Youlin & Qian, Lixian & Tyfield, David & Soopramanien, Didier, 2021. "On the heterogeneity in consumer preferences for electric vehicles across generations and cities in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    14. Estifanos, Tafesse & Polyakov, Maksym & Pandit, Ram & Hailu, Atakelty & Burton, Michael, "undated". "Protection of the Ethiopian Wolf: What are tourists willing to pay for?," Working Papers 272805, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    15. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    16. Robert Turner, 2013. "Using contingent choice surveys to inform national park management," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 3(2), pages 120-138, June.
    17. Johnson, F. Reed & Ozdemir, Semra & Phillips, Kathryn A., 2010. "Effects of simplifying choice tasks on estimates of taste heterogeneity in stated-choice surveys," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 183-190, January.
    18. Roy Brouwer & Wolfgang Haider & Lokugam Gunaratne & Ben Beardmore, 2010. "A Choice Experiment of Human–Elephant Conflict Resolution in Sri Lanka," Chapters, in: Jeff Bennett & Ekin Birol (ed.), Choice Experiments in Developing Countries, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Baskaran, Ramesh & Cullen, Ross & Colombo, Sergio, 2010. "Testing different types of benefit transfer in valuation of ecosystem services: New Zealand winegrowing case studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1010-1022, March.
    20. Fifer, Simon & Rose, John & Greaves, Stephen, 2014. "Hypothetical bias in Stated Choice Experiments: Is it a problem? And if so, how do we deal with it?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 164-177.

    More about this item

    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:acb:agenda:v:22:y:2015:i:1:p:45-62. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feanuau.html .

    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.