Public preferences for landscape features: The case of agricultural landscape in mountainous Mediterranean areas

被引:173
作者
Sayadi, Samir [1 ]
Gonzalez-Roa, M. Carmen [1 ]
Calatrava-Requena, Javier [1 ]
机构
[1] Andalusian Inst Agr Res & Training IFAPA, Dpt Agr Econ & Rural Sociol, Granada, Spain
关键词
Aesthetic value; Rural landscape; Conjoint Analysis; Contingent Valuation; Sustainable rural development; South-eastern Spain; LAND-USE CHANGE; CONTINGENT VALUATION; CONJOINT-MEASUREMENT; CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; VISUAL QUALITY; SUSTAINABLE LANDSCAPES; SCENIC BEAUTY; HEALTH-CARE; PHOTOGRAPHS; DYNAMICS;
D O I
10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.04.003
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Provision of landscape amenities produced by farmers, in addition to their economic function of producing food and fibre, has contributed to a reassessment of the role of agriculture in society. In this paper, we examine whether agricultural landscape provision really responds to a social demand as is argued by those in favour of multifunctionality. Thus, the aim of the present work is two-fold. First, we evaluate rural landscape preferences of citizens from a range of choices in the mountain area of the Alpujarras (southeastern Spain), and second, we estimate their willingness to pay (WTP) to enjoy each of the landscape characteristics existing in the area. For the empirical analysis, based on a survey of public preferences due to the good public characteristics of landscape amenities, we applied two stated preference methods: Conjoint Analysis (CA) and Contingent Valuation (CV). Three landscape attributes were considered for this analysis: type of vegetation layer, density of rural buildings, and level of slope. Several levels were also considered for each attribute: abandoned fields, dryland farming, irrigated farming, and natural lands were included for the vegetation layer: three levels (low, intermediate and intense) were considered for the level of slope and three levels (none, little and intense) for rural buildings. The empirical findings from the CA and CV confirm that the agricultural-landscape component (first irrigated lands, followed by dryland farming, within the attribute "vegetation layer"), plays an important role in public preferences on the landscape and WTP. Maintaining local agricultural activities, preventing future migration from agricultural lands, recovering abandoned fields, and including elements of rural landscape observation and appreciation of existing recreational programmes for rural tourism in the area, were among the strategies to take full advantage of this aesthetic landscape potential, and to foster sustainable development of the region. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:334 / 344
页数:11
相关论文
共 126 条
[1]   COMBINING REVEALED AND STATED PREFERENCE METHODS FOR VALUING ENVIRONMENTAL AMENITIES [J].
ADAMOWICZ, W ;
LOUVIERE, J ;
WILLIAMS, M .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 1994, 26 (03) :271-292
[2]   Perceptions versus objective measures of environmental quality in combined revealed and stated preference models of environmental valuation [J].
Adamowicz, W ;
Swait, J ;
Boxall, P ;
Louviere, J ;
Williams, M .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 1997, 32 (01) :65-84
[3]   Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: Choice experiments and contingent valuation [J].
Adamowicz, W ;
Boxall, P ;
Williams, M ;
Louviere, J .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 1998, 80 (01) :64-75
[4]   Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain [J].
Alvarez-Farizo, B ;
Hanley, N .
ENERGY POLICY, 2002, 30 (02) :107-116
[5]   EXPERT-BASED METHOD FOR THE EVALUATION OF VISUAL ABSORPTION CAPACITY OF THE LANDSCAPE [J].
AMIR, S ;
GIDALIZON, E .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 1990, 30 (03) :251-263
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2000, Landscape Research
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2001, CHOICE MODELLING APP
[8]   Sustainable landscapes: contradiction, fiction or utopia? [J].
Antrop, M .
LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING, 2006, 75 (3-4) :187-197
[9]  
ANTTILA M, 1980, EUR J MARKETING, V14, P397
[10]  
Ara S, 2003, 25 INT C AGR EC DURB