IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/agecon/v36y2007i3p405-419.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are citizens willing to pay for agricultural multifunctionality?

Author

Listed:
  • Zein Kallas
  • José A. Gómez‐Limón
  • Manuel Arriaza

Abstract

Agricultural multifunctionality is the recognition of the joint exercise of economic, environmental, and social functions by the agricultural sector. In order to make the concept operative for the design of public policies, it is necessary to estimate the social demand for such functions. The main objective of this article is to present an empirical application in this sense. For this purpose, we have adopted the agricultural system of cereal steppes in Tierra de Campos in Spain as a case study. The economic valuation technique used is the Choice Experiment. The results suggest the existence of a significant demand for the different functions, although the demand is heterogeneous, depending on the socioeconomic characteristics of the individuals surveyed.

Suggested Citation

  • Zein Kallas & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Manuel Arriaza, 2007. "Are citizens willing to pay for agricultural multifunctionality?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 36(3), pages 405-419, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:agecon:v:36:y:2007:i:3:p:405-419
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-0862.2007.00216.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2007.00216.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2007.00216.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bennett, Jeffrey W. & van Bueren, Martin & Whitten, Stuart M., 2004. "Estimating society's willingness to pay to maintain viable rural communities," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(3), pages 1-26.
    2. Alan Randall, 2002. "Valuing the outputs of multifunctional agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 29(3), pages 289-307, July.
    3. Randall, Alan & Hoehn, John P., 1996. "Embedding in Market Demand Systems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 369-380, May.
    4. Gomez-Limon, J.A. & Atance, I., 2004. "Identification of public objectives related to agricultural sector support," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(8-9), pages 1045-1071, December.
    5. Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley & Javier Calatrava‐Requena, 2005. "Designing Policy for Reducing the Off‐farm Effects of Soil Erosion Using Choice Experiments," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(1), pages 81-95, March.
    6. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    7. Bateman, Ian J, et al, 1997. "Does Part-Whole Bias Exist? An Experimental Investigation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(441), pages 322-332, March.
    8. 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.
    9. 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(1), pages 1-8, April.
    10. Batie, Sandra S., 2003. "The Multifunctional Attributes of Northeastern Agriculture: A Research Agenda," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 1-8, April.
    11. José A. Gómez-Limón & Ignacio Atance, 2004. "Identification of Public Objectives Related to Agricultural Sector Support," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2004/57, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    12. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-719, November.
    13. Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey (ed.), 2001. "The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2028.
    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. Lizin, Sebastien & Van Passel, Steven & Schreurs, Eloi, 2015. "Farmres' Perceived Cost of Land Use restrictions: A Simulated Purchasing Decision Using Dscrete Choice Experiments," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212054, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Peterson, Hikaru Hanawa & Hustvedt, Gwendolyn & Chen, Yun-Ju (Kelly), 2008. "US Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Wool Product Attributes," 2008 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2008, Dallas, Texas 6747, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    3. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    4. Andreas Niedermayr & Lena Schaller & Petr Mariel & Pia Kieninger & Jochen Kantelhardt, 2018. "Heterogeneous Preferences for Public Goods Provided by Agriculture in a Region of Intensive Agricultural Production: The Case of the Marchfeld," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, June.
    5. Yingtao Wu & Maogang Tang & Zhonghao Zhang & Baijun Wu, 2019. "Whether Urban Development and Ecological Protection Can Achieve a Win-Win Situation—The Nonlinear Relationship between Urbanization and Ecosystem Service Value in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-15, June.
    6. Klaus Mittenzwei & Stefan Mann & Karen Refsgaard & Valborg Kvakkestad, 2016. "Hot cognition in agricultural policy preferences in Norway?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 33(1), pages 61-71, March.
    7. Pérez y Pérez, Luis & Egea, Pilar & de-Magistris, Tiziana, 2019. "When agrarian multifunctionality matters: identifying heterogeneity in societal preferences for externalities of marginal olive groves in Aragon, Spain," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 85-92.
    8. Moon, Wanki & Griffith, Jacob Wayne, 2011. "Assessing holistic economic value for multifunctional agriculture in the US," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 455-465, August.
    9. Bohátová Zuzana & Schwarcz Pavol & Schwarczová Loreta & Bandlerová Anna & Tľčik Vojtech, 2016. "Multifunctionality – Interactions and Implications: The Case of the Podkylava Village (Western Slovakia)," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 8(2), pages 147-159, June.
    10. Moon, Wanki & Chang, Jae Bong & Asirvatham, Jebaraj, 2016. "Identifying Factors Driving US Citizens’ Preferences about Multifunctional Agriculture," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 230032, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    11. Ilaria Zambon & Artemi Cerdà & Sirio Cividino & Luca Salvati, 2019. "The (Evolving) Vineyard’s Age Structure in the Valencian Community, Spain: A New Demographic Approach for Rural Development and Landscape Analysis," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-13, March.
    12. Varela, Elsa & Kallas, Zein, 2022. "Extensive Mediterranean agroecosystems and their linked traditional breeds: Societal demand for the conservation of the Majorcan black pig," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    13. Jones, Benjamin A. & Berrens, Robert P. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank & Silva, Carol & Ripberger, Joe & Carlson, Deven & Gupta, Kuhika & Wehde, Wesley, 2018. "In search of an inclusive approach: Measuring non-market values for the effects of complex dam, hydroelectric and river system operations," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 225-236.
    14. Noor-E-Sabiha & Sanzidur Rahman, 2018. "Environment-Smart Agriculture and Mapping of Interactions among Environmental Factors at the Farm Level: A Directed Graph Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    15. Kallas, Zein & Baba, Yasmina & Rabell, Maria Cristina, 2012. "How Important Are Cultural and Environmental Objectives for Rice farmers in South Senegal?," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 125980, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. George Cusworth & Jennifer Dodsworth, 2021. "Using the ‘good farmer’ concept to explore agricultural attitudes to the provision of public goods. A case study of participants in an English agri-environment scheme," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(4), pages 929-941, December.
    17. Yang, Yu-Chen, 2018. "Factors affecting consumers’ willingness to pay for animal welfare eggs in Taiwan," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(6), July.
    18. Mesa-Jurado, Maria A. & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Ruto, Eric & Berbel, Julio, 2011. "The economic value of guaranteed water supply for irrigation under scarcity conditions," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114650, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Gómez-Limón, José A. & Sanchez-Fernandez, Gabriela, 2010. "Empirical evaluation of agricultural sustainability using composite indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1062-1075, March.
    20. Viegas, Ines & Santos, Jose Manuel Lima & Fontes, Magda Aguiar, 2011. "Joint Production of Safer, Cleaner and Animal Friendlier Beef: Do Consumers Join it Too? - Insights from Focus Groups," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115551, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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. Kallas, Z. & Gómez-Limón, J.A., 2007. "Valoración De La Multifuncionalidad Agraria: Una Aplicación A Través Del Método De Los Experimentos De Elección/Agricultural Multifunctionality Valuation: A Case Study Using The Choice Experiment," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 25, pages 107-144, Abril.
    2. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    3. Ekin Birol & Katia Karousakis & Phoebe Koundouri, 2008. "Using a choice experiment to inform implementation of the European Union Water Framework Directive: the case of Cheimaditida Wetland in Greece," DEOS Working Papers 0808, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    4. Moon, Wanki & Chang, Jae Bong & Asirvatham, Jebaraj, 2016. "Identifying Factors Driving US Citizens’ Preferences about Multifunctional Agriculture," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 230032, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Birol, Ekin & Karousakis, Katia & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2006. "Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes: The case of Cheimaditida wetland in Greece," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 145-156, November.
    6. Moon, Wanki & Griffith, Jacob Wayne, 2011. "Assessing holistic economic value for multifunctional agriculture in the US," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 455-465, August.
    7. Choi, Andy S., 2013. "Nonmarket values of major resources in the Korean DMZ areas: A test of distance decay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 97-107.
    8. Martin Van Bueren & Jeff Bennett, 2004. "Towards the development of a transferable set of value estimates for environmental attributes," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-32, March.
    9. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    10. Barr, Rhona F. & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Investigating fishers' preferences for the design of marine Payments for Environmental Services schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 91-103.
    11. Concu, Giovanni B., 2007. "Investigating distance effects on environmental values: a choice modelling approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(2), pages 1-20.
    12. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2008. "Testing for differences in benefit transfer values between state and regional frameworks," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(2), pages 1-20.
    13. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Rinaldo Brau, 2008. "Demand-Driven Sustainable Tourism? A Choice Modelling Analysis," Tourism Economics, , vol. 14(4), pages 691-708, December.
    15. Choi, Andy S. & Ritchie, Brent W. & Papandrea, Franco & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Economic valuation of cultural heritage sites: A choice modeling approach," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 213-220.
    16. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2014. "Valuation framing and attribute scope variation in a choice experiment to asses the impacts of changing land use from agriculture to mining," 2014 Conference (58th), February 4-7, 2014, Port Macquarie, Australia 165888, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    17. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2014. "Assessing the trade-offs of increased mining activity in the Surat Basin, Queensland: preferences of Brisbane residents using nonmarket valuation techniques," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 58(1), January.
    18. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    19. Choi, Andy S., 2011. "Implicit prices for longer temporary exhibitions in a heritage site and a test of preference heterogeneity: A segmentation-based approach," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 511-519.
    20. De Ayala Bilbao, Amaya & Hoyos Ramos, David & Mariel Chladkova, Petr, 2012. "Landscape valuation through discrete choice experiments: Current practice and future research reflections," BILTOKI 1134-8984, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • Q11 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Aggregate Supply and Demand Analysis; Prices
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water

    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:bla:agecon:v:36:y:2007:i:3:p:405-419. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.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.