IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ddj/fseeai/y2015i2p86-91.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Aquaculture Model for Sustainable Rural Development

Author

Listed:
  • Adrian Gheorghe ZUGRAVU

    (Dunarea de Jos University of Galati, Romania)

  • Ionica SOARE

    (Dunarea de Jos University of Galati, Romania)

Abstract

The paper follows two main objectives: to understand aquaculture farmers’ perception and image of social services and to identify communication levers in order to improve the perceived image of social farming. Orientations in terms of communication are product-focused and aim at enhancing the reputation of social farming consequently with impact on rural development. This paper conducted a questionnaire survey of Romanian aquaculture farmers’ perception toward social agricultural. The empirical study indicated that farmers shown different awareness to social farming.

Suggested Citation

  • Adrian Gheorghe ZUGRAVU & Ionica SOARE, 2015. "Social Aquaculture Model for Sustainable Rural Development," Economics and Applied Informatics, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, issue 2, pages 86-91.
    • Handle: RePEc:ddj:fseeai:y:2015:i:2:p:86-91
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.eia.feaa.ugal.ro/images/eia/2015_2/ZugravuSoare.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Birol, Ekin & Koundouri, Phoebe & Kountouris, Yiannis, 2010. "Assessing the economic viability of alternative water resources in water-scarce regions: Combining economic valuation, cost-benefit analysis and discounting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 839-847, February.
    2. Armstrong, J. Scott & Morwitz, Vicki G. & Kumar, V., 2000. "Sales forecasts for existing consumer products and services: Do purchase intentions contribute to accuracy?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 383-397.
    3. 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)

    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. Phoebe Koundouri & Osiel Gonzalez Davila, 2013. "The Use of Ecosystem Services Approach in Guiding Water Valuation and Management: Inland and Coastal Waters," DEOS Working Papers 1334, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    2. Wenting Chen & Phoebe Koundouri & Osiel Gonzalez Davila & Claire Haggett & David Rudolph & Shiau-Yun Lu & Chia-Fa Chi & Jason Yu & Lars Golmen & Yung-Hsiang Ying, 2020. "Social acceptance and socioeconomic effects of Multi-Use Offshore Developments:Theory and Applications in MERMAID and TROPOS projects," DEOS Working Papers 2021, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    3. 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.
    4. Divine Ikenwilo & Sebastian Heidenreich & Mandy Ryan & Colette Mankowski & Jameel Nazir & Verity Watson, 2018. "The Best of Both Worlds: An Example Mixed Methods Approach to Understand Men’s Preferences for the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(1), pages 55-67, February.
    5. Asinyaka Michael, 2019. "Willingness to Pay for Energy Efficient Refrigerating Appliances in Accra, Ghana: A Choice Experiment Approach," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 70(1), pages 15-39, April.
    6. 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.
    7. Richard C. Ready & Patricia A. Champ & Jennifer L. Lawton, 2010. "Using Respondent Uncertainty to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in a Stated Choice Experiment," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(2), pages 363-381.
    8. Khan, Mohammed Tajuddin & Kishore, Avinash & Joshi, Pramod K., 2016. "Gender dimensions on farmers’ preferences for direct-seeded rice with drum seeder in India," IFPRI discussion papers 1550, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. Bolinches, Antonio & Blanco-Gutiérrez, Irene & Zubelzu, Sergio & Esteve, Paloma & Gómez-Ramos, Almudena, 2022. "A method for the prioritization of water reuse projects in agriculture irrigation," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    10. Thang Nam Do & Jeff Bennett, 2010. "Using Choice Experiments to Estimate Wetland Values in Viet Nam: Implementation and Practical Issues," Chapters, in: Jeff Bennett & Ekin Birol (ed.), Choice Experiments in Developing Countries, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Schläpfer, Felix & Schmitt, Marcel & Roschewitz, Anna, 2008. "Competitive politics, simplified heuristics, and preferences for public goods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 574-589, April.
    12. Sorada Tapsuwan & Michael Burton & Aditi Mankad & David Tucker & Murni Greenhill, 2014. "Adapting to Less Water: Household Willingness to Pay for Decentralised Water Systems in Urban Australia," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(4), pages 1111-1125, March.
    13. 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.
    14. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    15. Birol, Ekin & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2008. "Choice Experiments Informing Environmental Policy:A European Perspective," MPRA Paper 38232, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Robert Gillespie & Jeff Bennett, 2013. "Willingness to pay for kerbside recycling in Brisbane, Australia," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(3), pages 362-377, April.
    17. Kragt, Marit Ellen & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2011. "Using choice experiments to value catchment and estuary health in Tasmania with individual preference heterogeneity," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(2), pages 1-21.
    18. repec:diw:diwwpp:dp1513 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. Jeff Bennett & Jeremy Cheesman & Russell Blamey & Marit Kragt, 2016. "Estimating the non-market benefits of environmental flows in the Hawkesbury-Nepean River," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 236-248, July.

    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:ddj:fseeai:y:2015:i:2:p:86-91. 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: Gianina Mihai (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fegalro.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.