IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae08/44214.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Forest and landed real estate owners; suppliers of rural amenities and agricultural land

Author

Listed:
  • Polman, Nico B.P.
  • Slangen, Louis H.G.

Abstract

Land-use in rural areas may be reallocated between farmland and forest and nature areas. This paper addresses reasons for forest and landed estate owners to own their property and motivations for different activities of forest and real estate owners, including leasing out land to farmers. In 2006 we carried a survey among 171 forest and landed estates owners in the Eastern part of the Netherlands (response rate of 44%). Preserving family property, preserving nature and landscape, and hobby or spending free time are ranked as important reasons for having a forestry enterprise or a landed estate. Most of the owners can be characterised as multifunctional. They often fulfil a combination of wood production, preservation of nature and landscape, providing facilities for tourism and hunting, leasing out of land and agriculture. Based on results of regression analysis we can conclude that not every forest and landed estate owner prefers multifunctionality in a similar way. Leasing out land to farmers is one of activities where income is an important reason.

Suggested Citation

  • Polman, Nico B.P. & Slangen, Louis H.G., 2008. "Forest and landed real estate owners; suppliers of rural amenities and agricultural land," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44214, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae08:44214
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.44214
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/44214/files/365a.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.44214?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. Isabel Vanslembrouck & Guido Van Huylenbroeck & Wim Verbeke, 2002. "Determinants of the Willingness of Belgian Farmers to Participate in Agri‐environmental Measures," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 489-511, November.
    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. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    2. Melindi-Ghidi, Paolo & Dedeurwaerdere, Tom & Fabbri, Giorgio, 2020. "Using environmental knowledge brokers to promote deep green agri-environment measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    3. Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani, 2016. "Labor Donation Or Money Donation? Pro-Sociality On Prevention Of Natural Disasters In A Case Of Cyclone Aila, Bangladesh," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 61(01), pages 1-26, March.
    4. Jongeneel, Roelof A. & Polman, Nico B.P. & Slangen, Louis H.G., 2005. "Why Are Farmers Going Multifunctional?," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24585, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Anne GASSIAT & Sylvain ROUSSET & Frèdèric ZAHM, 2011. "Improving water quality with a territorial agro-environmental policy? Insights from the new generation AES in South-West France," ERSA conference papers ersa10p1569, European Regional Science Association.
    6. Kanchanaroek, Yingluck & Aslam, Uzma, 2017. "Assessing Farmers’ Preferences To Participate In Agri-environment Policies In Thailand," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 260888, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Espinosa-Goded, Maria & Dupraz, Pierre & Barreiro-Hurlé, Jesùs, 2009. "Fixed costs involved in crop pattern changes and agri-environmental schemes," Working Papers 211000, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    8. Kuhfuss, Laure & Préget, Raphaële & Thoyer, Sophie & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2022. "Enhancing spatial coordination in payment for ecosystem services schemes with non-pecuniary preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    9. Lefebvre, Marianne & Midler, Estelle & Bontems, Philippe, 2020. "Adoption of environmentally-friendly agricultural practices with background risk: experimental evidence," TSE Working Papers 20-1079, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    10. Yaofeng Yang & Yajuan Chen & Zhenrong Yu & Pengyao Li & Xuedong Li, 2020. "How Does Improve Farmers’ Attitudes toward Ecosystem Services to Support Sustainable Development of Agriculture? Based on Environmental Kuznets Curve Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    11. Osgathorpe, Lynne M. & Park, Kirsty & Goulson, Dave & Acs, Szvetlana & Hanley, Nick, 2011. "The trade-off between agriculture and biodiversity in marginal areas: Can crofting and bumblebee conservation be reconciled?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1162-1169, April.
    12. Bardhan, D. & Singh, P. & Tripathi, S.C., 2014. "Leveraging Information and Communication Technology Infrastructure of Dairy Cooperative Network: An ex-ante Analysis of Potential Institutional Innovation," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 27(Conferenc).
    13. Ross Kingwell & Michele John & Michael Robertson, 2008. "A review of a community-based approach to combating land degradation: dryland salinity management in Australia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 899-912, December.
    14. Aude Ridier & Charilaos Kephaliacos & Francoise Carpy-Goulard, 2011. "Private transaction costs and environmental cross compliance in a crop region of Southwestern France," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(1/2), pages 68-79.
    15. Wieck, Christine & Annen, Dominic N., 2012. "Participation, compliance and synergies at the farm level between the single payments scheme and farm certification labels," Discussion Papers 122123, University of Bonn, Institute for Food and Resource Economics.
    16. Jane Mills & Peter Gaskell & Julie Ingram & Janet Dwyer & Matt Reed & Christopher Short, 2017. "Engaging farmers in environmental management through a better understanding of behaviour," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(2), pages 283-299, June.
    17. Doris Läpple, 2010. "Adoption and Abandonment of Organic Farming: An Empirical Investigation of the Irish Drystock Sector," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 697-714, September.
    18. Pierre Dupraz & Karine Latouche & Francois Bonnieux, 2004. "Economic implications of scale and threshold effects in agri-environmental processes," Post-Print hal-01931556, HAL.
    19. Stine Broch & Suzanne Vedel, 2012. "Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-Environmental Contract Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 561-581, April.
    20. Rabotyagov, Sergey S. & Lin, Sonja, 2013. "Small forest landowner preferences for working forest conservation contract attributes: A case of Washington State, USA," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 307-330.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Land Economics/Use;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:eaae08:44214. 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.