Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land: The Case of Prime Agricultural Land
John C. Bergstrom, Bradford Dillman, John R. Stoll
Abstract
John C. Bergstrom, Bradford Dillman, John R. Stoll
Abstract
Abstract Failure of land markets to account for environmental amenity benefits may lend support to public policies to protect agricultural land. The contingent valuation method is employed to estimate willingness to pay for such amenities in Greenville County, South Carolina. Marginal household amenity benefits were estimated at $.06 per thousand acres using a payment card in a mail survey with 53 percent response. Bid payment vehicle was found not to significantly influence bids received. The informational structure of the contingent market was found to influence valuation responses, reinforcing the hypothesis that respondents react to alternative contingent market structures. The relationship between contingent market structure and directional effects upon responses is an important area for future research.
OpenAlex reports 177 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Abstract Failure of land markets to account for environmental amenity benefits may lend support to public policies to protect agricultural land. The contingent valuation method is employed to estimate willingness to pay for such amenities in Greenville County, South Carolina. Marginal household amenity benefits were estimated at $.06 per thousand acres using a payment card in a mail survey with 53 percent response. Bid payment vehicle was found not to significantly influence bids received. The informational structure of the contingent market was found to influence valuation responses, reinforcing the hypothesis that respondents react to alternative contingent market structures. The relationship between contingent market structure and directional effects upon responses is an important area for future research.
Key concepts: Amenity, Contingent valuation, Valuation (finance), Payment, Nonmarket forces, Payment card, Agricultural land, Willingness to pay