Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T17:28:01.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measuring the Nonmarket Value of Massachusetts Agricultural Land: A Case Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

John M. Halstead
John M. Halstead*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, North Dakota State University
Get access

Abstract

Agricultural land provides a variety of “nonmarket” services to the Commonwealth, including wildlife habitat, scenic vistas, and recreation. This study utilizes an iterative bidding game to estimate willingness-to-pay of residents of three central Massachusetts counties to preserve state agricultural land. Through the use of these data, estimates of the value of these nonmarket amenities are derived so that a fuller measure of the value of agricultural land can be obtained. This information may be useful to policy makers administering such programs as the Agricultural Preservation Restriction Act (Chapter 780) which are designed to arrest the conversion of Massachusetts farmland to urban uses.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , April 1984 , pp. 12 - 19
Copyright
Copyright © Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The author gratefully acknowledges helpful review comments from the Department of Agricultural Economics at North Dakota State University and the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of Massachusetts, especially Tom Stevens and Jay Leitch, as well as the anonymous referees. North Dakota State University journal article no. 1247.

References

Bailey, Mark R., Rosenberger, Lisa J., and Kohlman, Michael R. Massachusetts Agricultural Viability Study. United States Department of Agriculture, December 1982.Google Scholar
Bishop, Richard C., and Herberlein, Thomas A. “Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61(1979): 926–30.Google Scholar
Brookshire, David S., Ives, Berry C., and Schulze, William D. “The Valuation of Aesthetic Preferences.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 3(1976): 325–46.Google Scholar
Correli, Mark R., Lillydahl, Jane H., and Singell, Larry D. “The Effects of Greenbelts on Residential Property Values: Some Findings on the Political Economy of Open Spaces.” Land Economics (1978): 207–17.Google Scholar
Freeman, A. Myrick, III. “Approaches to Measuring Public Goods Demands.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61(1979): 915–920.Google Scholar
Halstead, John M., Stevens, Thomas H., and Foster, John H. Measuring the Nonmarket Value of Agricultural Land: A Case Study. Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin Number 672. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, January 1982.Google Scholar
Randall, Alan B., Ives, Berry C., and Eastman, Clyde. “Bidding Games for Valuation of Aesthetic Environmental Improvements.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 1(1974): 132–49.Google Scholar
Smith, V. Kerry. “The Estimation and Use of Models of the Demand for Outdoor Recreation.” In National Academy of Sciences, Assessing Demand for Recreation. Washington, D.C.: NAS, 1975Google Scholar