IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v28y2010i2p211-224.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Diversity of Practical Quota Systems for Farmland Preservation: A Multicountry Comparison and Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Rong Tan

    (Department of Land Management, College of Public Administration, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310029, China)

  • Volker Beckmann

    (Division of Resource Economics, Institute of Agricultural Economics and Social Sciences, Humboldt University of Berlin, D 10099 Berlin, Germany)

Abstract

Diverse quota systems are designed and implemented in different countries to preserve farmland. Choosing a quota system for farmland preservation is thus an important issue for policy makers and researchers. In order to explain this diversity and reveal shared principles for the choice of a quota system in practice, we compare typical quota arrangements in four countries through a model of transaction cost economics (TCE). We examine agricultural zoning in the Netherlands, the transferable development right in the US, command-and-control quotas and their supplemented trading mode in China, and the debated tradable planning permits for land-use control in Germany. Our comparison not only shows that extending TCE into tradable quota theory is feasible, but also compares experience with the tools of farmland preservation across the four countries. Furthermore, the shared principles we discover could also be reference points for the rest of the world.

Suggested Citation

  • Rong Tan & Volker Beckmann, 2010. "Diversity of Practical Quota Systems for Farmland Preservation: A Multicountry Comparison and Analysis," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 28(2), pages 211-224, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:28:y:2010:i:2:p:211-224
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://epc.sagepub.com/content/28/2/211.abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tianxiao Zhou & Rong Tan & Thomas Sedlin, 2018. "Planning Modes for Major Transportation Infrastructure Projects (MTIPs): Comparing China and Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-23, September.
    2. Till Proeger & Lukas Meub & Kilian Bizer, 2018. "Laboratory Experiments of Tradable Development Rights: A Synthesis of Different Treatments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Rongyu Wang & Rong Tan, 2018. "Rural Renewal of China in the Context of Rural-Urban Integration: Governance Fit and Performance Differences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, February.
    4. Guan Li & Zhongguo Xu & Cifang Wu & Yuefei Zhuo & Xinhua Tong & Yanfei Wei & Xiaoqiang Shen, 2019. "Inside or Outside? The Impact Factors of Zoning–Land Use Mismatch," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-25, December.

    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:sae:envirc:v:28:y:2010:i:2:p:211-224. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (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.