IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/joafsc/359380.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Future of Farming on the Urban Edge: Insights from 15 U.S. Counties about Farmland Protection and Farm Viability

Author

Listed:
  • Oberholtzer, Lydia
  • Clancy, Kate
  • Esseks, J. Dixon

Abstract

Farmland protection and farm viability are two important aspects of urban-edge farming. Surveys of landowners and informant interviews were completed between 2005 and 2007 in 15 U.S. counties to examine the opportunities and constraints that farmers face in these areas. Landowners’ perceptions about the future outlook for their county’s agriculture varied greatly. Many operators in counties producing long-established crops, such as corn and soybeans, rely heavily on wholesale markets for sales. In other counties, farmers depend on a mix of wholesale and direct markets. Study results show that over half the respondents relying on direct markets operate small acreage farms with low gross agricultural sales. Operators using primarily wholesale markets tended to be more optimistic about the profitability and acces­sibility of their markets and the outlook for agricul­ture in their county than those depending on direct markets. In additional results from the survey, almost a third felt that equal emphasis should be placed on farmland preservation and farm viability efforts in order to keep farming viable in their county, while approximately the same number felt the priority should be protecting agricultural land from development via growth management policies. The unique characteristics of agriculturally important counties undergoing urbanization pressures pose challenges and opportunities to researchers and developers to recognize and employ the strategies that will help maintain a viable agricultural sector for urban-edge farming.

Suggested Citation

  • Oberholtzer, Lydia & Clancy, Kate & Esseks, J. Dixon, 2010. "The Future of Farming on the Urban Edge: Insights from 15 U.S. Counties about Farmland Protection and Farm Viability," Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, Center for Transformative Action, Cornell University, vol. 1(2).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:joafsc:359380
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/359380/files/25.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heimlich, Ralph E. & Anderson, William D., 2001. "Development At The Urban Fringe And Beyond: Impacts On Agriculture And Rural Land," Agricultural Economic Reports 33943, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Hellerstein, Daniel & Nickerson, Cynthia J. & Cooper, Joseph C. & Feather, Peter & Gadsby, Dwight M. & Mullarkey, Daniel J. & Tegene, Abebayehu & Barnard, Charles H., 2002. "Farmland Protection: The Role Of Public Preferences For Rural Amenities," Agricultural Economic Reports 33963, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Ready, Richard C. & Abdalla, Charles W., 2003. "The Amenity And Disamenity Impacts Of Agriculture: Estimates From A Hedonic Pricing Model In Southeastern Pennsylvania," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22196, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Bills, Nelson L., 2007. "Fifty Years of Farmland Protection Legislation in the Northeast: Persistent Issues and Emergent Research Opportunities," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-9, October.
    4. Joshua M. Duke & Lori Lynch, 2006. "Farmland Retention Techniques: Property Rights Implications and Comparative Evaluation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(2), pages 189-213.
    5. Walls, Margaret & McConnell, Virginia & Kopits, Elizabeth, 2003. "How Well Can Markets for Development Rights Work? Evaluating a Farmland Preservation Program," RFF Working Paper Series dp-03-08, Resources for the Future.
    6. Schilling, Brian J. & Attavanich, Witsanu & Sullivan, Kevin P. & Marxen, Lucas J., 2014. "Measuring the effect of farmland preservation on farm profitability," MPRA Paper 100122, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jun 2014.
    7. Batie, Sandra S., 2003. "The Multifunctional Attributes of Northeastern Agriculture: A Research Agenda," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 32(01), pages 1-8, April.
    8. Charlotte Ham & John B. Loomis & Patricia A. Champ, 2015. "Relative Economic Values of Open Space Provided by National Forest and Military Lands to Surrounding Communities," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 81-96, March.
    9. Giuseppe Di Liddo, 2015. "Urban sprawl and regional growth: empirical evidence from Italian Regions," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(4), pages 2141-2160.
    10. Alison Blay-Palmer & Roberta Sonnino & Julien Custot, 2016. "A food politics of the possible? Growing sustainable food systems through networks of knowledge," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 33(1), pages 27-43, March.
    11. Michael A. Stoll, 2006. "Job sprawl, spatial mismatch, and black employment disadvantage," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 827-854.
    12. Carrión-Flores, Carmen E. & Flores-Lagunes, Alfonso & Guci, Ledia, 2018. "An estimator for discrete-choice models with spatial lag dependence using large samples, with an application to land-use conversions," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 77-93.
    13. Barry Kew & Brian D. Lee, 2013. "Measuring Sprawl across the Urban Rural Continuum Using an Amalgamated Sprawl Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-23, April.
    14. Schläpfer, F. & Mann, S., . "Eine erweiterte Gesamtrechnung der multifunktionalen Schweizer Landwirtschaft," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 48.
    15. Cicia, Gianni & Colantuoni, Francesca & Del Giudice, Teresa & Pascucci, Stefano, 2011. "Community Supported Agriculture in the Urban Fringe: Empirical Evidence for Project Feasibility in the Metropolitan Area of Naples (Italy)," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 2(3), pages 1-14, December.
    16. Nehring, Richard & Erickson, Kenneth & Michael, Harris & Hallahan, Charlie & Katchova, Ani, "undated". "Heartland, Southern Seaboard, and Prairie Gateway: A Farm-Level Analysis," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235666, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Dietrich Earnhart, 2006. "Using Contingent-Pricing Analysis to Value Open Space and Its Duration at Residential Locations," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(1), pages 17-35.
    18. McConnell, Virginia & Walls, Margaret & Kopits, Elizabeth, 2006. "Zoning, TDRs and the density of development," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 440-457, May.
    19. Hailu, Yohannes G. & Brown, Cheryl, 2007. "Regional Growth Impacts on Agricultural Land Development: A Spatial Model for Three States," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 36(01), pages 1-15, April.
    20. Kenya L. Covington, 2015. "Poverty Suburbanization: Theoretical Insights and Empirical Analyses," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(2), pages 71-90.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:ags:joafsc:359380. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.