IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Countryside Preferences: Exploring individuals’ WTP for the protection of traditional rural landscapes

  • Peter Howley


    (Rural Economy and Development Programme, Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland)

  • Stephen Hynes

    (Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit, J.E. Cairnes School of Business and Economics, National University of Ireland, Galway)

  • Cathal O’Donoghue

    (Rural Economy and Development Programme, Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland)

The rural landscape can be thought of as a non-market commodity associated with the multifunctional aspect of agriculture and the need for its conservation is gaining more prominence in EU policy. This paper explored the Irish general public’s willingness to pay (WTP) for agricultural activities aimed at protecting the rural landscape. Using factor analysis, variables representing individuals’ opinions on the importance of a variety of landscape features were derived. Features associated with the wider biological and cultural diversity of the countryside such as woodland, bogland, wild flora and fauna, water quality and features associated with our cultural heritage play a more significant role in influencing WTP than more traditional and obvious scenic features of farming activities such as open grass covered fields, grazing farm animals and well maintained farm buildings. In relation to personal characteristics, income, education, the presence of children within the family structure and whether respondents had siblings involved in farming were also all found to significantly affect WTP. Using a generalized Tobit Interval model, the average WTP for the conservation of the traditional rural landscape was estimated at €44 per person per year. The results would indicate a strong justification for increasing the support for second pillar objectives under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) such as the protection of the rural landscape.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
File Function: First version, 2009
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc in its series Working Papers with number 0906.

in new window

Length: 29 pages
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:tea:wpaper:0906
Contact details of provider: Postal: Athenry, Co Galway
Phone: +353 91 845845
Fax: +353 91 845847
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Arild Vatn, 2002. "Multifunctional agriculture: some consequences for international trade regimes," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 29(3), pages 309-327, July.
  2. Isabel Vanslembrouck & Guido Huylenbroeck & J. Meensel, 2005. "Impact of Agriculture on Rural Tourism: A Hedonic Pricing Approach," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(1), pages 17-30.
  3. 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(1), April.
  4. Carson, Richard T & Flores, Nicholas A, 2000. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt75k752s7, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
  5. Mandy Ryan & Verity Watson, 2009. "Comparing welfare estimates from payment card contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(4), pages 389-401.
  6. Alan Randall, 2002. "Valuing the outputs of multifunctional agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 29(3), pages 289-307, July.
  7. Reza Daniels & Sandrine Rospabé, 2005. "Estimating an Earnings Function from Coarsened Data by an Interval Censored Regression Procedure," Working Papers 05091, University of Cape Town, Development Policy Research Unit.
  8. Nunes, Paulo A. L. D., 2002. "Using factor analysis to identify consumer preferences for the protection of a natural area in Portugal," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 499-516, July.
  9. Kevin J. Boyle & F. Reed Johnson & Daniel W. McCollum, 1997. "Anchoring and Adjustment in Single-Bounded, Contingent-Valuation Questions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1495-1500.
  10. Kevin J. Boyle & F. Reed Johnson & Daniel W. McCollum & William H. Desvousges & Richard W. Dunford & Sara P. Hudson, 1996. "Valuing Public Goods: Discrete versus Continuous Contingent-Valuation Responses," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(3), pages 381-396.
  11. Dupont, Diane P., 2004. "Do children matter? An examination of gender differences in environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 273-286, July.
  12. R. K. Blamey & J. W. Bennett & M. D. Morrison, 1999. "Yea-Saying in Contingent Valuation Surveys," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(1), pages 126-141.
  13. Kline, Jeffrey & Wichelns, Dennis, 1996. "Measuring Public Preferences for the Environmental Amenities Provided by Farmland," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 23(4), pages 421-36.
  14. Cameron, Trudy Ann & Huppert, Daniel D., 1989. "OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values with payment card interval data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 230-246, November.
  15. Bromley, Daniel W & Hodge, Ian, 1990. "Private Property Rights and Presumptive Policy Entitlements: Reconsidering the Premises of Rural Policy," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 17(2), pages 197-214.
  16. Kevin J. Boyle & Hugh F. MacDonald & Hsiang-tai Cheng & Daniel W. McCollum, 1998. "Bid Design and Yea Saying in Single-Bounded, Dichotomous-Choice Questions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(1), pages 49-64.
  17. A Fleischer & Y Tsur, 2000. "Measuring the recreational value of agricultural landscape," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 27(3), pages 385-398, September.
  18. Hanley, Nicholas & Hynes, Stephen, 2008. "The "Crex crex" Lament: Estimating Landowners Willingness to Pay for Corncrake Conservation on Irish Farmland," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2008-14, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
  19. 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 173-90.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tea:wpaper:0906. 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: (John Lennon)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.