IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea05/19430.html

Public Preferences for Multifunctionality of Agriculture: National Survey of Registered Voters

Author

Listed:
  • Moon, Wanki
  • Kuethe, Todd H.
  • Kraft, Steven E.
  • Esseks, J. Dixon

Abstract

Our study used AFT survey data to analyze the preferences of registered voters with regard to the non-market (mulitifunctional) benefits that agriculture produces jointly with market commodities. Descriptive data analysis demonstrates that the US public considers the multifunctionality of agriculture as an important social issue. Regression models show that geographic regions can be very important in determining people's behavior with respect to the multifunctional benefits of agriculture. Voters living in Central Plains, Mountain, or West were generally less appreciative of the multifunctional benefits of agriculture when compared to those in Northeast region. However, if our study restricts the analysis to those who supported the multifunctionality concept, we have a dramatically different result: i.e., voters in the agriculturally abundant regions are likely to pay a significantly higher amount of additional taxes to support farmers for their supply of various multifunctional benefits to our society. This result suggests that it is important to take into account geographic regions when valuing the multifunctionality of agriculture and that the public's preferences can be quite heterogeneous within a particular geographic region.

Suggested Citation

  • Moon, Wanki & Kuethe, Todd H. & Kraft, Steven E. & Esseks, J. Dixon, 2005. "Public Preferences for Multifunctionality of Agriculture: National Survey of Registered Voters," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19430, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea05:19430
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.19430
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/19430/files/sp05mo05.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.19430?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. Drake, Lars, 1992. "The Non-market Value of the Swedish Agricultural Landscape," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 19(3), pages 351-364.
    2. McCalla, Alex F., 2003. "Liberalizing Agricultural Trade: Will It Ever Be a Reality?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(3), pages 1-16, December.
    3. 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.
    4. Abler, David, 2004. "Multifunctionality, Agricultural Policy, and Environmental Policy," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 8-17, April.
    5. Johnston, Robert J. & Swallow, Stephen K. & Bauer, Dana Marie & Anderson, Christopher M., 2003. "Preferences for Residential Development Attributes and Support for the Policy Process: Implications for Management and Conservation of Rural Landscapes," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 32(01), pages 1-18, April.
    6. David Blandford & Richard N. Boisvert & Linda Fulponi, 2003. "Nontrade Concerns: Reconciling Domestic Policy Objectives with Freer Trade in Agricultural Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(3), pages 668-673.
    7. B. Delworth Gardner, 1977. "The Economics of Agricultural Land Preservation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 59(5), pages 1027-1036.
    8. Cain, Zachary & Lovejoy, Stephen B., 2004. "History and Outlook for Farm Bill Conservation Programs," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 19(4), pages 1-6.
    9. Bromley, Daniel W., 1996. "The Environmental Implications Of Agriculture," Staff Papers 12591, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    10. Jeffrey Kline & Dennis Wichelns, 1994. "Using Referendum Data to Characterize Public Support for Purchasing Development Rights to Farmland," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(2), pages 223-233.
    11. Elena G. Irwin, 2002. "The Effects of Open Space on Residential Property Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(4), pages 465-480.
    12. Smith, Katherine R., 2004. "The Growing Prevalence of Emergency, Disaster, and Other Ad Hoc Farm Program Payments: Implications for Agri-Environmental and Conservation Programs," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 1-7, April.
    13. Jeffrey M. Peterson & Richard N. Boisvert & Harry de Gorter, 2002. "Environmental policies for a multifunctional agricultural sector in open economies," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 29(4), pages 423-443, 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. 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. Thilo W. Glebe & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2008. "Assessing the production and welfare effects of agri-environmental policy: a conceptual analysis," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 1(1), pages 75-92.
    3. Lori Lynch & Wesley N. Musser, 2001. "A Relative Efficiency Analysis of Farmland Preservation Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 577-594.
    4. Boisvert, Richard N. & Blandford, David, 2012. "Meeting multiple policy objectives under GHG emission reduction targets," 86th Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2012, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 135515, Agricultural Economics Society.
    5. Boisvert, Richard N. & Blandford, David, 2011. "Meeting multiple policy objectives under GHG emissions reduction targets," Working Papers 126617, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    6. Mara Thiene & Yacov Tsur, 2013. "Agricultural Landscape Value and Irrigation Water Policy," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 641-653, September.
    7. Moon, Wanki, . "Multifunctional Agriculture, Protectionism, And Prospect Of Trade Liberalization," Journal of Rural Development/Nongchon-Gyeongje, Korea Rural Economic Institute, vol. 33(2), pages 1-33.
    8. Abler, David, 2004. "Multifunctionality, Agricultural Policy, and Environmental Policy," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 8-17, April.
    9. 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.
    10. Kashian, Russell, 2004. "State Farmland Preferential Assessment: A Comparative Study," Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, Mid-Continent Regional Science Association, vol. 34(01), pages 1-12.
    11. Yerushalmi, Erez, 2018. "Using Water Allocation in Israel as a Proxy for Imputing the Value of Agricultural Amenities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 12-20.
    12. Robert Deacon & Felix Schläpfer, 2010. "The Spatial Range of Public Goods Revealed Through Referendum Voting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 305-328, November.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Aliza Fleischer & Yacov Tsur, 2009. "The Amenity Value of Agricultural Landscape and Rural–Urban Land Allocation," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 132-153, February.
    16. Glebe, Thilo W., 2011. "Welfare economics of agricultural trade liberalisation and strategic environmental policy," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 8(2).
    17. Coisnon, Thomas & Oueslati, Walid & Salanié, Julien, 2014. "Urban sprawl occurrence under spatially varying agricultural amenities," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 38-49.
    18. McConnell, Virginia D. & Kopits, Elizabeth & Walls, Margaret, 2003. "How Well Can Markets for Development Rights Work? Evaluating a Farmland Preservation Program," Discussion Papers 10659, Resources for the Future.
    19. Casamatta, Georges & Rausser, Gordon & Simon, Leo, 2011. "Optimal taxation with joint production of agriculture and rural amenities," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 544-553, September.
    20. Yerushalmi, Erez, "undated". "Measuring the administrative water allocation mechanism and agricultural amenities," Economic Research Papers 270633, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.

    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:aaea05:19430. 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: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.