Land-use planning and public preferences: What can we learn from choice experiment method?

In this article we discuss the economic approach to evaluate landscape preferences for land-use planning. We then use the choice experiment method to examine public preferences for three landscape features – hedgerows, farm buildings and scrubland – in the Monts d’Arrée region (in Brittany, France),...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Landscape and urban planning 2007-12, Vol.83 (4), p.318-326
Hauptverfasser: Rambonilaza, Mbolatiana, Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 326
container_issue 4
container_start_page 318
container_title Landscape and urban planning
container_volume 83
creator Rambonilaza, Mbolatiana
Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne
description In this article we discuss the economic approach to evaluate landscape preferences for land-use planning. We then use the choice experiment method to examine public preferences for three landscape features – hedgerows, farm buildings and scrubland – in the Monts d’Arrée region (in Brittany, France), in the context of re-design of landscape conservation policy by the local environmental institute. Surveys were undertaken on two user groups, visitors and local residents. Our objective was to obtain empirical evidence of the difference between the preferences of tourists and residents, for landscape attributes. We then analysed the welfare changes of tourists and residents affected by different landscape programmes. Our results point out the strong divergence between the landscape preferences of the public and those of local public actors. The comparison of the estimated values of willingness to pay for single-attribute landscaping action shows some divergence between residents’ and tourists’ ranking of preferences for agricultural landscape areas. Finally, we find, at least for the socio-economic context examined in this study, that apart from its social, cultural and aesthetic values, rural landscape has economic values, and that agricultural landscape preservation tends to be more beneficial to low-income social groups.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.05.013
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_02589255v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0169204607001387</els_id><sourcerecordid>20473723</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c513t-59ba5b1167fb285e55dd79e09496d3026bdc074cafc40b60fece0c0ee804863f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkcGr1DAQxoMouD79H-JBwUPrJGnSxos8FvUJC14UwUtIp1M3S7etSfvU_96Ufag3PQ0Mv_lm5vsYeyqgFCDMy1M5-LFbYzvnWkqAugRdglD32E40tSwMGHmf7TJrCwmVecgepXQCAKGN2LEvhzxerIn4JjCG8SvPDT6v7RCQz5F6ijQipVf889EvHP3IvxMfyMeR93E6czxOAYnTj5liONO48DMtx6l7_Zg96P2Q6MldvWKf3r75uL8pDh_evd9fHwrUQi2Ftq3XrRCm7lvZaNK662pLYCtrOgXStB1CXaHvsYLWQE9IgEDUQNUY1asr9uKie_SDm_MNPv50kw_u5vrgth5I3Vip9a3I7PMLO8fp20ppceeQkIb8O01rctmhWtVS_RMUeTcoazNoLyDGKaXs1-8TBLgtIndyf0XktogcaJcjyrPP7pb4hH7oox8xpD8CtmmUVVXm9heOso23gaJLGLZUuhAJF9dN4T-2_QLGfazF</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>14860399</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Land-use planning and public preferences: What can we learn from choice experiment method?</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Rambonilaza, Mbolatiana ; Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne</creator><creatorcontrib>Rambonilaza, Mbolatiana ; Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne</creatorcontrib><description>In this article we discuss the economic approach to evaluate landscape preferences for land-use planning. We then use the choice experiment method to examine public preferences for three landscape features – hedgerows, farm buildings and scrubland – in the Monts d’Arrée region (in Brittany, France), in the context of re-design of landscape conservation policy by the local environmental institute. Surveys were undertaken on two user groups, visitors and local residents. Our objective was to obtain empirical evidence of the difference between the preferences of tourists and residents, for landscape attributes. We then analysed the welfare changes of tourists and residents affected by different landscape programmes. Our results point out the strong divergence between the landscape preferences of the public and those of local public actors. The comparison of the estimated values of willingness to pay for single-attribute landscaping action shows some divergence between residents’ and tourists’ ranking of preferences for agricultural landscape areas. Finally, we find, at least for the socio-economic context examined in this study, that apart from its social, cultural and aesthetic values, rural landscape has economic values, and that agricultural landscape preservation tends to be more beneficial to low-income social groups.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0169-2046</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-6062</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.05.013</identifier><identifier>CODEN: LUPLEZ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Applied ecology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Economic valuation ; Environmental Sciences ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General aspects ; Landscape values ; Rural land-use conflict ; Stated choice method</subject><ispartof>Landscape and urban planning, 2007-12, Vol.83 (4), p.318-326</ispartof><rights>2007 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>2008 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c513t-59ba5b1167fb285e55dd79e09496d3026bdc074cafc40b60fece0c0ee804863f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c513t-59ba5b1167fb285e55dd79e09496d3026bdc074cafc40b60fece0c0ee804863f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0595-8491 ; 0000-0003-1491-9504</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.05.013$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,3548,27922,27923,45993</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=19883934$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02589255$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rambonilaza, Mbolatiana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne</creatorcontrib><title>Land-use planning and public preferences: What can we learn from choice experiment method?</title><title>Landscape and urban planning</title><description>In this article we discuss the economic approach to evaluate landscape preferences for land-use planning. We then use the choice experiment method to examine public preferences for three landscape features – hedgerows, farm buildings and scrubland – in the Monts d’Arrée region (in Brittany, France), in the context of re-design of landscape conservation policy by the local environmental institute. Surveys were undertaken on two user groups, visitors and local residents. Our objective was to obtain empirical evidence of the difference between the preferences of tourists and residents, for landscape attributes. We then analysed the welfare changes of tourists and residents affected by different landscape programmes. Our results point out the strong divergence between the landscape preferences of the public and those of local public actors. The comparison of the estimated values of willingness to pay for single-attribute landscaping action shows some divergence between residents’ and tourists’ ranking of preferences for agricultural landscape areas. Finally, we find, at least for the socio-economic context examined in this study, that apart from its social, cultural and aesthetic values, rural landscape has economic values, and that agricultural landscape preservation tends to be more beneficial to low-income social groups.</description><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Economic valuation</subject><subject>Environmental Sciences</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Landscape values</subject><subject>Rural land-use conflict</subject><subject>Stated choice method</subject><issn>0169-2046</issn><issn>1872-6062</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkcGr1DAQxoMouD79H-JBwUPrJGnSxos8FvUJC14UwUtIp1M3S7etSfvU_96Ufag3PQ0Mv_lm5vsYeyqgFCDMy1M5-LFbYzvnWkqAugRdglD32E40tSwMGHmf7TJrCwmVecgepXQCAKGN2LEvhzxerIn4JjCG8SvPDT6v7RCQz5F6ijQipVf889EvHP3IvxMfyMeR93E6czxOAYnTj5liONO48DMtx6l7_Zg96P2Q6MldvWKf3r75uL8pDh_evd9fHwrUQi2Ftq3XrRCm7lvZaNK662pLYCtrOgXStB1CXaHvsYLWQE9IgEDUQNUY1asr9uKie_SDm_MNPv50kw_u5vrgth5I3Vip9a3I7PMLO8fp20ppceeQkIb8O01rctmhWtVS_RMUeTcoazNoLyDGKaXs1-8TBLgtIndyf0XktogcaJcjyrPP7pb4hH7oox8xpD8CtmmUVVXm9heOso23gaJLGLZUuhAJF9dN4T-2_QLGfazF</recordid><startdate>20071207</startdate><enddate>20071207</enddate><creator>Rambonilaza, Mbolatiana</creator><creator>Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>1XC</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0595-8491</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1491-9504</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20071207</creationdate><title>Land-use planning and public preferences: What can we learn from choice experiment method?</title><author>Rambonilaza, Mbolatiana ; Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c513t-59ba5b1167fb285e55dd79e09496d3026bdc074cafc40b60fece0c0ee804863f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Economic valuation</topic><topic>Environmental Sciences</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Landscape values</topic><topic>Rural land-use conflict</topic><topic>Stated choice method</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rambonilaza, Mbolatiana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><jtitle>Landscape and urban planning</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rambonilaza, Mbolatiana</au><au>Dachary-Bernard, Jeanne</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Land-use planning and public preferences: What can we learn from choice experiment method?</atitle><jtitle>Landscape and urban planning</jtitle><date>2007-12-07</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>83</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>318</spage><epage>326</epage><pages>318-326</pages><issn>0169-2046</issn><eissn>1872-6062</eissn><coden>LUPLEZ</coden><abstract>In this article we discuss the economic approach to evaluate landscape preferences for land-use planning. We then use the choice experiment method to examine public preferences for three landscape features – hedgerows, farm buildings and scrubland – in the Monts d’Arrée region (in Brittany, France), in the context of re-design of landscape conservation policy by the local environmental institute. Surveys were undertaken on two user groups, visitors and local residents. Our objective was to obtain empirical evidence of the difference between the preferences of tourists and residents, for landscape attributes. We then analysed the welfare changes of tourists and residents affected by different landscape programmes. Our results point out the strong divergence between the landscape preferences of the public and those of local public actors. The comparison of the estimated values of willingness to pay for single-attribute landscaping action shows some divergence between residents’ and tourists’ ranking of preferences for agricultural landscape areas. Finally, we find, at least for the socio-economic context examined in this study, that apart from its social, cultural and aesthetic values, rural landscape has economic values, and that agricultural landscape preservation tends to be more beneficial to low-income social groups.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.05.013</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0595-8491</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1491-9504</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0169-2046
ispartof Landscape and urban planning, 2007-12, Vol.83 (4), p.318-326
issn 0169-2046
1872-6062
language eng
recordid cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_02589255v1
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Animal, plant and microbial ecology
Applied ecology
Biological and medical sciences
Economic valuation
Environmental Sciences
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
General aspects
Landscape values
Rural land-use conflict
Stated choice method
title Land-use planning and public preferences: What can we learn from choice experiment method?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T04%3A02%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Land-use%20planning%20and%20public%20preferences:%20What%20can%20we%20learn%20from%20choice%20experiment%20method?&rft.jtitle=Landscape%20and%20urban%20planning&rft.au=Rambonilaza,%20Mbolatiana&rft.date=2007-12-07&rft.volume=83&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=318&rft.epage=326&rft.pages=318-326&rft.issn=0169-2046&rft.eissn=1872-6062&rft.coden=LUPLEZ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.05.013&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_hal_p%3E20473723%3C/proquest_hal_p%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=14860399&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0169204607001387&rfr_iscdi=true