IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaa116/95331.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Las Vias Pecuarias Y La Planificacion Territorial

Author

Listed:
  • Guaita Pradas, Inmaculada
  • Barrachina Martinez, Isabel
  • Fuensanta, Marin Soler

Abstract

La creciente demanda de activos ambientales por la sociedad, hace que recursos ambientales que hoy están en desuso sean susceptibles de tener nuevos valores por la utilidad que proporcionan, no solo a los habitantes del medio rural donde están inmersos, sino también a los habitantes del medio urbano que los pueden utilizar con finalidades recreativas y de contacto con la naturaleza. Un buen ejemplo de este tipo de recurso son las vías pecuarias, que han sido utilizadas durante más de 500 años para el paso del ganado; coincidiendo con el auge económico del sector agropecuario en España. Debido al proceso de desarrollo económico industrial se han ido abandonando paulatinamente, llegando en la actualidad a un estado de deterioro en algunos casos irreversible. El deterioro esta causado por una parte por el abandono de su uso principal, el paso del ganado, y por otra por las intrusiones tanto públicas como privadas. La puesta en valor de nuevo de las vías pecuarias requiere su valoración económica previa. Para realizar la valoración económica de bienes que carecen de mercado, como son las vías pecuarias, se hace necesaria la utilización de métodos de valoración indirectos. En este trabajo se aplica el método de valoración contingente para valorar la Cañada Real del Reino de Valencia en el tramo de Camporrobles a Buñol, basado en la encuesta realizada a 103 personas, usuarias potenciales de la Cañada Real tras un hipotético proyecto de rehabilitación con fines recreativos y de contacto con la naturaleza. Este proyecto además se plantea como posible impulsor del desarrollo económico de la zona basado en la potencial demanda turística que la recuperación de la Cañada Real del Reino de Valencia pueda atraer.

Suggested Citation

  • Guaita Pradas, Inmaculada & Barrachina Martinez, Isabel & Fuensanta, Marin Soler, 2010. "Las Vias Pecuarias Y La Planificacion Territorial," 116th Seminar, October 27-30, 2010, Parma, Italy 95331, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa116:95331
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.95331
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/95331/files/Fronte%20combined.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.95331?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. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    2. Richard T. Carson & Nicholas E. Flores & Kerry M. Martin & Jennifer L. Wright, 1996. "Contingent Valuation and Revealed Preference Methodologies: Comparing the Estimates for Quasi-Public Goods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(1), pages 80-99.
    3. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    4. Klein, Julius, 1920. "The Mesta: A Study in Spanish Economic History 1273-1836," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number klein1920.
    5. Rowe, Robert D. & Schulze, William D. & Breffle, William S., 1996. "A Test for Payment Card Biases," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 178-185, September.
    6. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 1988. "A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 355-379, September.
    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. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    2. Agha Akram & Sheila Olmstead, 2011. "The Value of Household Water Service Quality in Lahore, Pakistan," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(2), pages 173-198, June.
    3. Smith, V. Kerry & Mansfield, Carol, 1998. "Buying Time: Real and Hypothetical Offers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 209-224, November.
    4. Bergstrom, John C. & Taylor, Laura O., 2006. "Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: Theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 351-360, December.
    5. Leslie Richardson & Lynne Lewis, 2022. "Getting to know you: individual animals, wildlife webcams, and willingness to pay for brown bear preservation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 673-692, March.
    6. Ndebele, Tom & Forgie, Vicky, 2017. "Estimating the economic benefits of a wetland restoration programme in New Zealand: A contingent valuation approach," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 75-89.
    7. Aadland, David & Caplan, Arthur J., 2003. "Cheap Talk Revisited: New Evidence From Cvm," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22112, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Whittington, Dale & Hua Wang, 2000. "Willingness to pay for air quality improvements in Sofia, Bulgaria," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2280, The World Bank.
    9. V. Smith & Xiaolong Zhang & Raymond Palmquist, 1997. "Marine Debris, Beach Quality, and Non-Market Values," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(3), pages 223-247, October.
    10. Nick Hanley & Felix Schlapfer, "undated". "Calibration of Stated Willingness to Pay for Public Goods with Voting and Tax Liability Data: Provision of Landscape Amenities in Switzerland," Working Papers 2002_2, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    11. Smith, V. Kerry, 2000. "JEEM and Non-market Valuation: 1974-1998," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 351-374, May.
    12. Loomis, John B., 2010. "Testing Construct Validity of River Recreation Use Values: A Comparison of Direct Elicitation of Use Values to Use Values Inferred Indirectly from WTP for Total Economic Value," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 60410, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. John C. Whitehead & O. Ashton Morgan & William L. Huth, 2018. "Convergent validity of stated preference methods to estimate willingness-to-pay for seafood traceability: The case of Gulf of Mexico oysters," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 38(1), pages 326-335.
    14. Oerlemans, Leon A.G. & Chan, Kai-Ying & Volschenk, Jako, 2016. "Willingness to pay for green electricity: A review of the contingent valuation literature and its sources of error," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 875-885.
    15. Lee, Stephanie J. & Neumann, Peter J. & Churchill, W. Hallowell & Cannon, Marie E. & Weinstein, Milton C. & Johannesson, Magnus, 1997. "Patients' willingness to pay for autologous blood donation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 1-12, April.
    16. Carmelo J. León & Jorge E. Araña & Arturo Melián, 2003. "Tourist Use and Preservation Benefits from Big-Game Fishing in the Canary Islands," Tourism Economics, , vol. 9(1), pages 53-65, March.
    17. Achilleas Vassilopoulos & Niki Avgeraki & Stathis Klonaris, 2020. "Social desirability and the WTP–WTA disparity in common goods," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 6425-6444, October.
    18. Liljas, Bengt & Blumenschein, Karen, 2000. "On hypothetical bias and calibration in cost-benefit studies," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 53-70, May.
    19. León, Carmelo J. & Araña, Jorge E. & Hanemann, W. Michael & Riera, Pere, 2014. "Heterogeneity and emotions in the valuation of non-use damages caused by oil spills," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 129-139.
    20. Richard Carson & Theodore Groves, 2007. "Incentive and informational properties of preference questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 181-210, May.

    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:eaa116:95331. 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/eaaeeea.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.