IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/iptwpa/jrc65456.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Value of EU Agricultural Landscape

Author

Abstract

The present paper provides a meta-analysis of agricultural landscape valuation studies and, through the estimated benefit transfer function, projects the value of EU landscape. The analyses are based on information from more than thirty European and non-European studies which use a stated preference approach to uncover society's willingness to pay (WTP) for agricultural landscape. Our calculations show that, the WTP in the EU varies between 134 and 201 €/ha with an average value of 149 €/ha in 2009. Furthermore the calculations indicate that the total value of EU landscape in 2009 is estimated to be in the range of €24.5 – 36.6 billion per year, with an average of €27.1 billion, representing around 8 percent of the total value of EU agricultural production and roughly half of the CAP expenditures.

Suggested Citation

  • Pavel CIAIAN & Sergio GOMEZ y PALOMA, 2011. "The Value of EU Agricultural Landscape," JRC Working Papers JRC65456, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
  • Handle: RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc65456
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC65456
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marangon, Francesco & Visintin, Francesca, 2007. "Rural landscape valuation in a cross-border region," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), INRA (French National Institute for Agricultural Research), vol. 84.
    2. Moran, Dominic & McVittie, Alistair & Allcroft, David J. & Elston, David A., 2007. "Quantifying public preferences for agri-environmental policy in Scotland: A comparison of methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 42-53, June.
    3. Bennett, Jeffrey W. & van Bueren, Martin & Whitten, Stuart M., 2004. "Estimating society's willingness to pay to maintain viable rural communities," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(3), September.
    4. Pruckner, Gerald J, 1995. "Agricultural Landscape Cultivation in Austria: An Application of the CVM," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 22(2), pages 173-190.
    5. Luke Brander & Raymond Florax & Jan Vermaat, 2006. "The Empirics of Wetland Valuation: A Comprehensive Summary and a Meta-Analysis of the Literature," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, pages 223-250.
    6. Ekin Birol & Phoebe Koundouri, "undated". "Choice Experiments Informing Environmental Policy:A European Perspective," DEOS Working Papers 0801, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    7. Mas-Colell, Andreu & Whinston, Michael D. & Green, Jerry R., 1995. "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680.
    8. Knut Per Hasund & Mitesh Kataria & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2011. "Valuing public goods of the agricultural landscape: a choice experiment using reference points to capture observable heterogeneity," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(1), pages 31-53.
    9. Barrio, Melina & Loureiro, Maria L., 2010. "A meta-analysis of contingent valuation forest studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1023-1030, March.
    10. Douglas Noonan, 2003. "Contingent Valuation and Cultural Resources: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Literature," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 27(3), pages 159-176, November.
    11. Ian Bateman & Ian Langford, 1997. "Non-users' Willingness to Pay for a National Park: An Application and Critique of the Contingent Valuation Method," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(6), pages 571-582.
    12. Lindhjem, Henrik, 2007. "20 years of stated preference valuation of non-timber benefits from Fennoscandian forests: A meta-analysis," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, pages 251-277.
    13. Marangon, Francesco & Troiano, Stefania & Visintin, F., 2008. "The economic value of olive plantation in rural areas. A study on a hill region between Italy and Slovenia," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44412, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Lindhjem, Henrik, 2007. "20 years of stated preference valuation of non-timber benefits from Fennoscandian forests: A meta-analysis," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, pages 251-277.
    15. Villa, Ferdinando & Wilson, Matthew A. & de Groot, Rudolf & Farber, Steven & Costanza, Robert & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "Designing an integrated knowledge base to support ecosystem services valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 445-456, June.
    16. Schlapfer, Felix, 2006. "Survey protocol and income effects in the contingent valuation of public goods: A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 415-429, May.
    17. Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Liebe, Ulf, 2010. "Determinants of protest responses in environmental valuation: A meta-study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 366-374, December.
    18. Bergstrom, John C. & Dillman, B. L. & Stoll, John R., 1985. "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land: The Case of Prime Agricultural Land," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, pages 139-149.
    19. V. Smith & Subhrendu Pattanayak, 2002. "Is Meta-Analysis a Noah's Ark for Non-Market Valuation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, pages 271-296.
    20. Hoehn, John P & Randall, Alan, 1989. "Too Many Proposals Pass the Benefit Cost Test," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 544-551, June.
    21. Arriaza Balmón, Manuel & Gomez-Limon, Jose Antonio & Kallas, Zein & Nekhay, Olexandr, 2008. "Demand for non-commodity outputs from mountain olive groves," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(1), January.
    22. Rosenberger, Randall S. & Walsh, Richard G., 1997. "Nonmarket Value Of Western Valley Ranchland Using Contingent Valuation," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(02), December.
    23. Mary Jo Kealy & Robert W. Turner, 1993. "A Test of the Equality of Closed-Ended and Open-Ended Contingent Valuations," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(2), pages 321-331.
    24. G. D. Garrod & K. G. Willis, 1995. "Valuing The Benefits Of The South Downs Environmentally Sensitive Area," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 160-173.
    25. Russ Kashian & Mark Skidmore, 2002. "Preserving Agricultural Land via Property Assessment Policy and the Willingness to Pay for Land Preservation," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 16(1), pages 75-87, February.
    26. Yrjola, Tapani & Kola, Jukka, 2004. "Consumer Preferences Regarding Multifunctional Agriculture," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA), vol. 7(02).
    27. Schlapfer, Felix & Roschewitz, Anna & Hanley, Nick, 2004. "Validation of stated preferences for public goods: a comparison of contingent valuation survey response and voting behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 1-16, November.
    28. Zein Kallas & José A. Gómez-Limón & Jesús Barreiro Hurlé, 2007. "Decomposing the Value of Agricultural Multifunctionality: Combining Contingent Valuation and the Analytical Hierarchy Process," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 218-241, June.
    29. Bowker, James Michael & Didychuk, D.D., 1994. "Estimation Of The Nonmarket Benefits Of Agricultural Land Retention In Eastern Canada," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 23(2), October.
    30. Nick Hanley & Douglas MacMillan & Robert E. Wright & Craig Bullock & Ian Simpson & Dave Parsisson & Bob Crabtree, 1998. "Contingent Valuation Versus Choice Experiments: Estimating the Benefits of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 1-15.
    31. Smith, V Kerry & Huang, Ju-Chin, 1995. "Can Markets Value Air Quality? A Meta-analysis of Hedonic Property Value Models," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(1), pages 209-227, February.
    32. Peter Kennedy, 2003. "A Guide to Econometrics, 5th Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 5, volume 1, number 026261183x, January.
    33. Begona Alvarez-Farizo, 1999. "Estimating the Benefits of Agri-environmental Policy: Econometric Issues in Open-ended Contingent Valuation Studies," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(1), pages 23-43.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sandhu, Harpinder S. & Crossman, Neville D. & Smith, F. Patrick, 2012. "Ecosystem services and Australian agricultural enterprises," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 19-26.
    2. Krajčírová Renáta & Ferenczi Vaňová Alexandra & Munk Michal, 2016. "Agricultural Land and Land Tax – Significant Indicators of Agriculture Business Activities in the Slovak Republic," European Countryside, De Gruyter Open, vol. 8(2), pages 98-108, June.
    3. Žáková Kroupová, Zdenka & Havlíková, M. & Hálová, P. & Malý, M., 2016. "Economic Valuation of Mountain Landscapes and Ecosystems: A Meta-Analysis of Case Studies," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 8(3), September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    landscape valuation; willingness to pay (WTP); meta analysis; value of EU agricultural landscape; public goods; policy;

    JEL classification:

    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods

    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:ipt:iptwpa:jrc65456. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Publication Officer). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ipjrces.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.