IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipp/wpaper/1502.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reconciling landowner income and land prices: the case of Spanish and California oak woodlands

Author

Listed:
  • José L. Oviedo
  • Lynn Huntsinger
  • Pablo Campos

Abstract

We integrate data from commercial operations, non-market private amenities and capital gains to measure landowner income and profitability in six oak woodland case studies from Spain and California. Results show that private amenities make the greatest contribution to landowner income, while commercial benefits alone fall short of explaining land prices. We also estimate landowner self-employed labor income, but its contribution is marginal. Total real profitability ranges from 3.2 to 7.8% in the Spanish cases and from 6.0 to 9.3% in the California cases, showing that these oak woodlands compete with alternative investments when private amenities and capital gains are considered.

Suggested Citation

  • José L. Oviedo & Lynn Huntsinger & Pablo Campos, 2015. "Reconciling landowner income and land prices: the case of Spanish and California oak woodlands," Working Papers 1502, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
  • Handle: RePEc:ipp:wpaper:1502
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://investigacion.cchs.csic.es/RePEc/ipp/wpaper/csic-ipp-wp-2015-02_oviedo.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arthur H. Smith & William E. Martin, 1972. "Socioeconomic Behavior of Cattle Ranchers, with Implications for Rural Community Development in the West," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 54(2), pages 217-225.
    2. A. Caparros & P. Campos & G. Montero, 2003. "An operative framework for total hicksian income measurement - Application to a multiple-use forest," Post-Print hal-00719124, HAL.
    3. Bastian, Chris T. & McLeod, Donald M. & Germino, Matthew J. & Reiners, William A. & Blasko, Benedict J., 2002. "Environmental amenities and agricultural land values: a hedonic model using geographic information systems data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 337-349, March.
    4. Richard C. Ready & Jean C. Buzby & Dayuan Hu, 1996. "Differences between Continuous and Discrete Contingent Value Estimates," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(3), pages 397-411.
    5. Torell, L. Allen & Rimbey, Neil R. & Tanaka, John A. & Bailey, Scott A., 2001. "The Lack Of A Profit Motive For Ranching: Implications For Policy Analysis," Current Issues in Rangeland Resource Economics: Symposium Proceedings (2001) 16629, Western Regional Coordinating Committee on Rangeland Economics: WCC-55.
    6. Alejandro Caparrós & Pablo Campos & Gregorio Montero, 2003. "An Operative Framework for Total Hicksian Income Measurement: Application to a Multiple-Use Forest," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(2), pages 173-198, October.
    7. Torell, L. Allen & Rimbey, Neil R. & Ramirez, Octavio A. & McCollum, Daniel W., 2005. "Income Earning Potential versus Consumptive Amenities in Determining Ranchland Values," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(3), pages 1-24, December.
    8. 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.
    9. C. Arden Pope III, 1985. "Agricultural Productive and Consumptive Use Components of Rural Land Values in Texas," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 67(1), pages 81-86.
    10. Campos, Pablo & Daly-Hassen, Hamed & Oviedo, José L. & Ovando, Paola & Chebil, Ali, 2008. "Accounting for single and aggregated forest incomes: Application to public cork oak forests in Jerez (Spain) and Iteimia (Tunisia)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 76-86, March.
    11. Eisner, Robert, 1989. "The Total Incomes System of Accounts," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226196381.
    12. Sengupta, Sanchita & Osgood, Daniel Edward, 2003. "The value of remoteness: a hedonic estimation of ranchette prices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 91-103, February.
    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. José L Oviedo & Pablo Campos & Alejandro Caparrós, 2022. "Contingent valuation of landowner demand for forest amenities: application in Andalusia, Spain [Optimal design for discrete choice contingent valuation surveys: single-bound, double-bound and bivar," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 49(3), pages 615-643.
    2. Ovando, Paola & Campos, Pablo & Oviedo, José L. & Caparrós, Alejandro, 2016. "Ecosystem accounting for measuring total income in private and public agroforestry farms," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 43-51.
    3. Jose L. Oviedo & Lynn Huntsinger & Pablo Campos & Alejandro Caparrós, 2011. "Assessing the income value of private amenities in California oak woodlands," Working Papers 1110, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    4. James R. Wasson & Donald M. McLeod & Christopher T. Bastian & Benjamin S. Rashford, 2013. "The Effects of Environmental Amenities on Agricultural Land Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(3), pages 466-478.
    5. Ovando, Paola & Caparrós, Alejandro & Díaz-Balteiro, Luis & Pasalodos, María & Beguería, Santiago & Oviedo, José L. & Montero, Gregorio & Campos, Pablo, 2017. "Spatial valuation of forests' enviromental assets: an application to Andalusian Silvopastoral farms," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 66172, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Jose L. Oviedo & Pablo Campos & Alejandro Caparrós, 2010. "Simulated Exchange Value Method: Applying Green National Accounting to Forest Public Recreation," Working Papers 1016, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    7. Tanaka, John A. & Rimbey, Neil R. & Torell, L. Allen, 2005. "Rangeland Economics, Ecology, And Sustainability: Implications For Policy And Economic Research," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 4(1), pages 1-7.
    8. Polyakov, Maksym & Pannell, David J. & Pandit, Ram & Tapsuwan, Sorada & Park, Geoff, 2013. "Valuing Environmental Assets on Rural Lifestyle Properties," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(1), pages 159-175, April.
    9. Ritter, Matthias & Hüttel, Silke & Odening, Martin & Seifert, Stefan, 2020. "Revisiting the relationship between land price and parcel size in agriculture," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    10. Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Romain Craste & Bengt Kriström & Pere Riera, 2014. "Non-market valuation in France: An overview of the research activity," Working Papers hal-01087365, HAL.
    11. Ritter, Matthias & Huttel, Silke & Odening, Martin & Seifert, Stefan, 2019. "Revisiting The Relationship Between Land Price And Parcel Size," 2019 Conference (63rd), February 12-15, 2019, Melbourne, Australia 285062, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society (AARES).
    12. John, Kun H. & Youn, Yeo C. & Shin, Joon H., 2003. "Resolving conflicting ecological and economic interests in the Korean DMZ: a valuation based approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 173-179, August.
    13. Ju-Chin Huang & V. Kerry Smith, 1998. "Monte Carlo Benchmarks for Discrete Response Valuation Methods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 186-202.
    14. Zheng Liu & Ron Fleming & Angelos Pagoulatos & Wuyang Hu, 2010. "The Supply of Private Acreage for Public Recreational Use in Southern and Central Appalachia," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 540-555, December.
    15. Mashour, Terri & Alavalapati, Janaki & Matta, Rao & Larkin, Sherry & Carter, Doug, 2005. "A hedonic analysis of the effect of natural attributes and deed restrictions on the value of conservation easements," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(5), pages 771-781, August.
    16. Muhly, Tyler B. & Musiani, Marco, 2009. "Livestock depredation by wolves and the ranching economy in the Northwestern U.S," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2439-2450, June.
    17. Lynch, Lori & Duke, Joshua M., 2007. "Economic Benefits of Farmland Preservation: Evidence from the United States," Working Papers 7342, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    18. Keith H. Coble & J. Corey Miller & M. Darren Hudson, 2008. "Decoupled Farm Payments and Expectations for Base Updating," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 30(1), pages 27-42.
    19. Alejandro Caparrós & José L. Oviedo & Alejandro Álvarez & Pablo Campos, 2015. "Simulated exchange values and ecosystem accounting," Working Papers 1512, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    20. Bohara, Alok K. & McKee, Michael & Berrens, Robert P. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank & Silva, Carol L. & Brookshire, David S., 1998. "Effects of Total Cost and Group-Size Information on Willingness to Pay Responses: Open Ended vs. Dichotomous Choice," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 142-163, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    capital gains; dehesa; income accounting; private amenities; ranch; contingent valuation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth

    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:ipp:wpaper:1502. 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: Adelheid Holl (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ippcses.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.