Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tpknm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-29T19:31:38.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Economic Consequences of Measures for Preserving Farmland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Clayton W. Ogg
Clayton W. Ogg*
Affiliation:
Natural Resources Economics Div., USDA-ERS, Broomall, PA
Get access

Extract

In the Northeast, efforts to preserve farmland have been justified primarily on the basis of shared feelings and values concerning land use as it affects the environment and quality of life. However, attention is increasingly directed toward economic impacts. Although success in preserving rural environments depends upon anticipating the economic consequences of alternative preservation measures, it is easy for interested groups to overlook some economic impacts, while concentrating on others.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , April 1976 , pp. 39 - 49
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Ackerman, Bruce A., Rose-Ackerman, Susan, Sawyer, James W., and Henderson, Dale W., The Uncertain Search for Environmental Quality. London, 1974.Google Scholar
2. Anderson, William D., Gustafson, Gregory C., and Boxley, Robert E., “Perspectives on Agricultural Land Policy.” Reprint from the Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, Vol. 30, No. 1, January-February 1975.Google Scholar
3. Arnold, Michael, Editor, Land Use Planning Reports. April 28 1975.Google Scholar
4. Bills, Nelson L., “Extent of Local Efforts to Form Agricultural Districts in New York State.” Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council, Vol. IV, No. 1, pp. 87–108, April 1975Google Scholar
5. Bosselman, Fred and Callies, David, The Quiet Revolution in Land Use Control. Council on Environmental Quality, Washington, D.C., 1971.Google Scholar
6. Bosselman, Fred, Callies, David, and Banta, John, The Taking Issue. Council on Environmental Quality, Washington, DC, 1973.Google Scholar
7. Bryant, William R., Alternative Measures for Preserving Farm Land. Agricultural Extension Publication 75–5, Ithaca, New York, 1975.Google Scholar
8. Derr, Donn A., Norman, Thomas, and Schneider, Lee D., “Transfer of Development Rights – Its Problems and Potential as a Land Use Control Technique.” Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 185–198, October 1973.Google Scholar
9. Little, Charles E., Challenge of the Land. Elmsford, NY, 1969.Google Scholar
10. Park, William L., “Providing Benefits of Agricultural Open Space in Urbanizing Situations.” Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council, Vol. III, No. 2, pp. 205–217, October 1974.Google Scholar
11. Sargent, Frederic O., “Alternative Methods for Keeping Land in Agriculture.” Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 198–209, October 1973.Google Scholar
12. Schneider, Lee D., Kasper, Victor, Derr, Donn A., Dhillion, Pritam S., and Park, William, Issues in Agricultural Land Use Management in New Jersey. New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, S.R. 17, February 1973.Google Scholar