Valuation of ecosystem services from rural landscapes using agricultural land prices

Ma, Shan; Swinton, Scott M.

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.04.004

Cited by 76 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Conceptually, one would think that it would be feasible to disaggregate land prices into the prices of the various below-and above ground components of land, and eventually to estimate the monetary value of soils. However, attempts along those lines by Ma and Swinton (2011) in southwestern Michigan, using a Hedonic Price method, show how complex such an analysis turns out to be in practice. Indeed, the price of a given piece of land is related in a non-negligible manner to recreational and aesthetic features of the landscape surrounding the land (Dale and Polasky, 2007), or to features within the land parcel, such as the presence of a stream or river, that may however not affect soil services per se.…”

Section: Monetary Valuation Of Soil Services: Waiting For Godotmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this respect, the concept of "service" definitely has the upper hand, because it makes it possible to easily accommodate both positive and negative situations. Indeed, the term of "disservice" (Zhang et al, 2007;Ma and Swinton, 2011;Power, 2012;Bastian et al, 2013;Lele et al, 2013;Raymond et al, 2013;Li et al, 2014;Shackleton et al, 2016) carries unambiguously the suggestion of negative consequences for its recipients. In recent years, however, a number of authors have argued strongly against the use of this notion of disservice.…”

Section: Soil Functions or Services Or Both?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Soil “Ecosystem” Services and Natural Capital: Critical Appraisal of Research on Uncertain Ground

Baveye

Gowdy

2016

Front. Environ. Sci.

302

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Monetary Valuation Of Soil Services: Waiting For Godotmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Soil Functions or Services Or Both?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil “Ecosystem” Services and Natural Capital: Critical Appraisal of Research on Uncertain Ground

Baveye

Gowdy

2016

Front. Environ. Sci.

302

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Direct market analysis estimates the economic Ma and Swinton, 2011). In addition, the stated-preference methods provide an alternative, comparative way to estimate the monetary value of most ES.…”

Section: Economic Valuation Of Esmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applying the ecosystem services framework to pasture-based livestock farming systems in Europe

Rodríguez-Ortega

Oteros‐Rozas

Ripoll-Bosch

et al. 2014

Animal

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of 'Ecosystem Services' (ES) focuses on the linkages between ecosystems, including agroecosystems, and human well-being, referring to all the benefits, direct and indirect, that people obtain from ecosystems. In this paper, we review the application of the ES framework to pasture-based livestock farming systems, which allows (1) regulating, supporting and cultural ES to be integrated at the same level with provisioning ES, and (2) the multiple trade-offs and synergies that exist among ES to be considered. Research on livestock farming has focused mostly on provisioning ES (meat, milk and fibre production), despite the fact that provisioning ES strongly depends on regulating and supporting ES for their existence. We first present an inventory of the non-provisioning ES (regulating, supporting and cultural) provided by pasture-based livestock systems in Europe. Next, we review the trade-offs between provisioning and non-provisioning ES at multiple scales and present an overview of the methodologies for assessing biophysical trade-offs. Third, we present non-biophysical (economical and socio-cultural) methodologies and applications for ES valuation. We conclude with some recommendations for policy design.

show abstract

“…A much smaller segment of the literature explores the value of on-farm recreational and aesthetic ecosystem services (Bastian et al 2002, Torell et al 2005 or the value of both on-farm and off-farm land-based ecosystem services (Ma and Swinton 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Valuing Environmental Assets on Rural Lifestyle Properties

Polyakov

Pannell

Pandit

et al. 2013

Agric. resour. econ. rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lifestyle landowners value land for its amenities and ecological characteristics and could play an important role in managing and conserving native vegetation in multifunctional rural landscapes. We quantify values of ecosystem services captured by owners of rural lifestyle properties in Victoria, Australia, using a spatial hedonic property price model. The value of ecosystem services provided by native vegetation is maximized when that vegetation occupies about 40 percent of the area of a lifestyle property. Since the current median proportion of native vegetation is 15 percent, most lifestyle landowners could benefit from increasing the area of native vegetation on their properties.

show abstract

Valuation of ecosystem services from rural landscapes using agricultural land prices

Cited by 76 publications

References 34 publications

Soil “Ecosystem” Services and Natural Capital: Critical Appraisal of Research on Uncertain Ground

Soil “Ecosystem” Services and Natural Capital: Critical Appraisal of Research on Uncertain Ground

Applying the ecosystem services framework to pasture-based livestock farming systems in Europe

Valuing Environmental Assets on Rural Lifestyle Properties

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About