IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ukm/jlekon/v51y2017i1p145-158.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Segmenting Agricultural Land Market According to Development Potential: A Latent Class Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Khalid, Haniza

    (International Islamic University Malaysia)

Abstract

Not all farmlands are purchased for farming. Where development pressures are strong and urban boundaries still fluid, some farmlands are purchased for non-agricultural purposes. However, since the future development use is not evident or pre-determined at the time of transaction, the farmland market may appear to operate as one albeit with latent segments. Analyses of land price determinants should involve some measures to ascertain the cause and the degree of functional segmentation in the market, so that the shadow prices of different land attributes can be differentiated by market segments. Using an extensive dataset of over 2,000 Malaysian farmland sales, our Latent Class Analysis confirms that there are two underlying distinct distributions and that within each distribution, relationships between variables display considerable local independence. Strength of potential drivers of farmland price is proven to differ according to segments. In addition, we are able to show that the segment classifcation results based on the parcel’s ‘developability’ was fairly accurate when compared to the classifcation given by offcial land valuation documents. This exercise proves that unobserved segmentation can be predicted with a reasonable degree of accuracy simply by letting the data ‘speak for itself’. In terms of agricultural support funding, the segmentation may allow for the country’s better targeting of recipients and refnement of farm support programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Khalid, Haniza, 2017. "Segmenting Agricultural Land Market According to Development Potential: A Latent Class Approach," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 51(1), pages 145-158.
  • Handle: RePEc:ukm:jlekon:v:51:y:2017:i:1:p:145-158
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.17576/JEM-2017-5101-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ukm.my/jem/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/jeko_511-12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.17576/JEM-2017-5101-12?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vincenzo Atella & Francesco Brindisi & Partha Deb & Furio C. Rosati, 2004. "Determinants of access to physician services in Italy: a latent class seemingly unrelated probit approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(7), pages 657-668, July.
    2. Partha Deb, 2008. "Finite Mixture Models," Summer North American Stata Users' Group Meetings 2008 7, Stata Users Group, revised 28 Aug 2008.
    3. Arianto A. Patunru & John B. Braden & Sudip Chattopadhyay, 2007. "Who Cares about Environmental Stigmas and Does It Matter? A Latent Segmentation Analysis of Stated Preferences for Real Estate," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(3), pages 712-726.
    4. Cynthia J. Nickerson & Lori Lynch, 2001. "The Effect of Farmland Preservation Programs on Farmland Prices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(2), pages 341-351.
    5. Edward Morey & Jennifer Thacher & William Breffle, 2006. "Using Angler Characteristics and Attitudinal Data to Identify Environmental Preference Classes: A Latent-Class Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(1), pages 91-115, May.
    6. Gwendolyn Aldrich & Kristine Grimsrud & Jennifer Thacher & Matthew Kotchen, 2007. "Relating environmental attitudes and contingent values: how robust are methods for identifying preference heterogeneity?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(4), pages 757-775, August.
    7. Cotteleer, Geerte & Stobbe, Tracy & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2008. "A Spatial Bayesian Hedonic Pricing Model of Farmland Values," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44137, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Morey, Edward & Thiene, Mara & De Salvo, Maria & Signorello, Giovanni, 2008. "Using attitudinal data to identify latent classes that vary in their preference for landscape preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 536-546, December.
    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. William Breffle & Edward Morey & Jennifer Thacher, 2011. "A Joint Latent-Class Model: Combining Likert-Scale Preference Statements With Choice Data to Harvest Preference Heterogeneity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(1), pages 83-110, September.
    2. Angel Bujosa & Antoni Riera & Robert Hicks, 2010. "Combining Discrete and Continuous Representations of Preference Heterogeneity: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(4), pages 477-493, December.
    3. Meldrum, James R., 2015. "Comparing different attitude statements in latent class models of stated preferences for managing an invasive forest pathogen," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 13-22.
    4. Stephane Hess & Nesha Beharry-Borg, 2012. "Accounting for Latent Attitudes in Willingness-to-Pay Studies: The Case of Coastal Water Quality Improvements in Tobago," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 52(1), pages 109-131, May.
    5. Pouta, Eija & Myyra, Sami & Hanninen, Harri, 2009. "Heterogeneous farmland owners: two approaches for objective based classification," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 50787, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Chung, Chanjin & Briggeman, Brian C. & Han, Sungill, 2012. "Willingness-to-Pay for Beef Quality Attributes: A Latent Segmentation Analysis of Korean Grocery Shoppers," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(4), pages 447-459, November.
    7. Cropper, Eric D. & McLeod, Donald M. & Bastian, Christopher T. & Keske, Catherine M. & Hoag, Dana L. & Cross, Jennifer E., 2012. "Factors Affecting Land Trust Agents’ Preferences for Conservation Easements," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 42(2), pages 1-16.
    8. Chen, Wendy Y. & Hua, Junyi, 2017. "Heterogeneity in resident perceptions of a bio-cultural heritage in Hong Kong: A latent class factor analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 170-179.
    9. Faccioli, Michela & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Glenk, Klaus & Martin-Ortega, Julia, 2020. "Environmental attitudes and place identity as determinants of preferences for ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    10. Khalid, Haniza & Lloyd, Timothy Adrian & Morgan, Christopher Wyn, 2013. "The Impact of Economic Transformation and the Credibility of Planning Control on Agricultural Land Values," Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, vol. 62(2).
    11. Andy S. Choi & Kelly S. Fielding, 2016. "Cultural Attitudes as WTP Determinants: A Revised Cultural Worldview Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-18, June.
    12. Kloos, Julia & Tsegai, Daniel W., 2009. "Preferences for domestic water services in the Middle Olifants sub-basin of South Africa," Discussion Papers 49970, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    13. Petr Mariel & Linda Arata, 2022. "Incorporating attitudes into the evaluation of preferences regarding agri‐environmental practices," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(2), pages 430-451, June.
    14. Novikova, Anastasija & Rocchi, Lucia & Vitunskienė, Vlada, 2017. "Assessing the benefit of the agroecosystem services: Lithuanian preferences using a latent class approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 277-286.
    15. Michela Faccioli & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Klaus Glenk & Julia Martin-Ortega, 2018. "Environmental attitudes and place identity as simultaneous determinants of preferences for environmental goods," Working Papers 2018-08, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    16. Morey, Edward & Thiene, Mara & De Salvo, Maria & Signorello, Giovanni, 2008. "Using attitudinal data to identify latent classes that vary in their preference for landscape preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 536-546, December.
    17. Tokunaga, Kanae & Sugino, Hiroaki & Nomura, Hideaki & Michida, Yutaka, 2020. "Norms and the willingness to pay for coastal ecosystem restoration: A case of the Tokyo Bay intertidal flats," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    18. Laurent Ott & Mehdi Farsi & Sylvain Weber, 2021. "Beyond political divides: analyzing public opinion on carbon taxation in Switzerland," Chapters, in: Axel Franzen & Sebastian Mader (ed.), Research Handbook on Environmental Sociology, chapter 17, pages 313-339, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Khalid, Haniza & Lloyd, Timothy Adrian & Morgan, Christopher Wyn, 2013. "The Impact of Economic Transformation and the Credibility of Planning Control on Agricultural Land Values," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 62(02), pages 1-12, May.
    20. Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2017. "Estimating recreational values of coastal zones," MPRA Paper 80911, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:ukm:jlekon:v:51:y:2017:i:1:p:145-158. 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: Muhammad Asri Abd Ghani (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feukmmy.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.