Economic impact and public costs of confined animal feeding operations at the parcel level of Craven County, North Carolina

Conflicts have arisen between communities and operators of confined animal feeding as farms have become bigger in order to maintain their competitiveness. These conflicts have been difficult to resolve because measuring and allocating the benefits and costs of livestock production is difficult. This...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Agriculture and human values 2010-03, Vol.27 (1), p.29-42
Hauptverfasser: Kim, Jungik, Goldsmith, Peter, Thomas, Michael H
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 42
container_issue 1
container_start_page 29
container_title Agriculture and human values
container_volume 27
creator Kim, Jungik
Goldsmith, Peter
Thomas, Michael H
description Conflicts have arisen between communities and operators of confined animal feeding as farms have become bigger in order to maintain their competitiveness. These conflicts have been difficult to resolve because measuring and allocating the benefits and costs of livestock production is difficult. This papers demonstrates a policy tool for promoting compromise whereby the community gets reduced negative impacts from livestock while at the same time continues to benefit from livestock jobs, taxes, and related economic activity. Public economic benefits and public economic costs of confined animal feeding operations are estimated for every farm and affected house in Craven County, North Carolina. The results show public economic benefits of $5.7 million and public economic costs of $2.2 million, but that the ratio of benefits to costs for individual farm-house pairs varies in important ways across the 26 hog farms in Craven County.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10460-009-9193-x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_746294678</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1945227981</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-3464c6acf0ecd821ce15cd31f1a0d18fdf0772eb53d7e2eca3c0b84fe52956983</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1rFTEUhgdR8Fr9Aa4Mbtw4evIxk8xShlYLRRdacBdyMye3KXOTMcmUFv-8uYwgdOEmCcnzHF7yNs1rCh8ogPyYKYgeWoChHejA2_snzY52krWK9_3TZgdKDS0I9fN58yLnWwBQEtiu-X1uY4hHb4k_LsYWYsJElnU_1xsbc8kkunoIzgec6qM_mpk4xMmHA4kLJlN8DJmYQsoNksUkizOZ8a6u1RyTucNAxriG8vCefI2p3JDRpDj7YF42z5yZM776u5811xfnP8Yv7dW3z5fjp6vWCuCl5aIXtjfWAdpJMWqRdnbi1FEDE1VuciAlw33HJ4kMreEW9ko47NjQ9YPiZ827be6S4q8Vc9FHn2vM2QSMa9ZS9GwQvTyRbx-Rt3FNoYbTjAoqB9HxCtENsinmnNDpJdVvSQ-agj6VobcydC1Dn8rQ99Vhm5MrGw6Y_g3-n_Rmk5yJ2hySz_r6OwPK4ZREKsX_AE7Zl9k</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>214179453</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Economic impact and public costs of confined animal feeding operations at the parcel level of Craven County, North Carolina</title><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Kim, Jungik ; Goldsmith, Peter ; Thomas, Michael H</creator><creatorcontrib>Kim, Jungik ; Goldsmith, Peter ; Thomas, Michael H</creatorcontrib><description>Conflicts have arisen between communities and operators of confined animal feeding as farms have become bigger in order to maintain their competitiveness. These conflicts have been difficult to resolve because measuring and allocating the benefits and costs of livestock production is difficult. This papers demonstrates a policy tool for promoting compromise whereby the community gets reduced negative impacts from livestock while at the same time continues to benefit from livestock jobs, taxes, and related economic activity. Public economic benefits and public economic costs of confined animal feeding operations are estimated for every farm and affected house in Craven County, North Carolina. The results show public economic benefits of $5.7 million and public economic costs of $2.2 million, but that the ratio of benefits to costs for individual farm-house pairs varies in important ways across the 26 hog farms in Craven County.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0889-048X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1572-8366</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10460-009-9193-x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Agricultural Economics ; Animals ; concentrated animal feeding operations ; cost benefit analysis ; Costs ; costs and returns ; Counties ; Economic activity ; Economic impact ; Economics ; Education ; Ethics ; Evolutionary Biology ; Farmers ; Farms ; History ; Hogs ; Houses ; Livestock ; Livestock industry ; Livestock production ; Noise ; Odors ; Philosophy ; Rural areas ; rural communities ; Studies ; swine ; Taxation ; Veterinary Medicine/Veterinary Science</subject><ispartof>Agriculture and human values, 2010-03, Vol.27 (1), p.29-42</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-3464c6acf0ecd821ce15cd31f1a0d18fdf0772eb53d7e2eca3c0b84fe52956983</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-3464c6acf0ecd821ce15cd31f1a0d18fdf0772eb53d7e2eca3c0b84fe52956983</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10460-009-9193-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10460-009-9193-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27331,27911,27912,33761,41475,42544,51306</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kim, Jungik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goldsmith, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Michael H</creatorcontrib><title>Economic impact and public costs of confined animal feeding operations at the parcel level of Craven County, North Carolina</title><title>Agriculture and human values</title><addtitle>Agric Hum Values</addtitle><description>Conflicts have arisen between communities and operators of confined animal feeding as farms have become bigger in order to maintain their competitiveness. These conflicts have been difficult to resolve because measuring and allocating the benefits and costs of livestock production is difficult. This papers demonstrates a policy tool for promoting compromise whereby the community gets reduced negative impacts from livestock while at the same time continues to benefit from livestock jobs, taxes, and related economic activity. Public economic benefits and public economic costs of confined animal feeding operations are estimated for every farm and affected house in Craven County, North Carolina. The results show public economic benefits of $5.7 million and public economic costs of $2.2 million, but that the ratio of benefits to costs for individual farm-house pairs varies in important ways across the 26 hog farms in Craven County.</description><subject>Agricultural Economics</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>concentrated animal feeding operations</subject><subject>cost benefit analysis</subject><subject>Costs</subject><subject>costs and returns</subject><subject>Counties</subject><subject>Economic activity</subject><subject>Economic impact</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Evolutionary Biology</subject><subject>Farmers</subject><subject>Farms</subject><subject>History</subject><subject>Hogs</subject><subject>Houses</subject><subject>Livestock</subject><subject>Livestock industry</subject><subject>Livestock production</subject><subject>Noise</subject><subject>Odors</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Rural areas</subject><subject>rural communities</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>swine</subject><subject>Taxation</subject><subject>Veterinary Medicine/Veterinary Science</subject><issn>0889-048X</issn><issn>1572-8366</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1rFTEUhgdR8Fr9Aa4Mbtw4evIxk8xShlYLRRdacBdyMye3KXOTMcmUFv-8uYwgdOEmCcnzHF7yNs1rCh8ogPyYKYgeWoChHejA2_snzY52krWK9_3TZgdKDS0I9fN58yLnWwBQEtiu-X1uY4hHb4k_LsYWYsJElnU_1xsbc8kkunoIzgec6qM_mpk4xMmHA4kLJlN8DJmYQsoNksUkizOZ8a6u1RyTucNAxriG8vCefI2p3JDRpDj7YF42z5yZM776u5811xfnP8Yv7dW3z5fjp6vWCuCl5aIXtjfWAdpJMWqRdnbi1FEDE1VuciAlw33HJ4kMreEW9ko47NjQ9YPiZ827be6S4q8Vc9FHn2vM2QSMa9ZS9GwQvTyRbx-Rt3FNoYbTjAoqB9HxCtENsinmnNDpJdVvSQ-agj6VobcydC1Dn8rQ99Vhm5MrGw6Y_g3-n_Rmk5yJ2hySz_r6OwPK4ZREKsX_AE7Zl9k</recordid><startdate>20100301</startdate><enddate>20100301</enddate><creator>Kim, Jungik</creator><creator>Goldsmith, Peter</creator><creator>Thomas, Michael H</creator><general>Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RQ</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>U9A</scope><scope>WZK</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100301</creationdate><title>Economic impact and public costs of confined animal feeding operations at the parcel level of Craven County, North Carolina</title><author>Kim, Jungik ; Goldsmith, Peter ; Thomas, Michael H</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-3464c6acf0ecd821ce15cd31f1a0d18fdf0772eb53d7e2eca3c0b84fe52956983</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Agricultural Economics</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>concentrated animal feeding operations</topic><topic>cost benefit analysis</topic><topic>Costs</topic><topic>costs and returns</topic><topic>Counties</topic><topic>Economic activity</topic><topic>Economic impact</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Evolutionary Biology</topic><topic>Farmers</topic><topic>Farms</topic><topic>History</topic><topic>Hogs</topic><topic>Houses</topic><topic>Livestock</topic><topic>Livestock industry</topic><topic>Livestock production</topic><topic>Noise</topic><topic>Odors</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Rural areas</topic><topic>rural communities</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>swine</topic><topic>Taxation</topic><topic>Veterinary Medicine/Veterinary Science</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kim, Jungik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goldsmith, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Michael H</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Career &amp; Technical Education Database</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>Art, Design &amp; Architecture Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Arts &amp; Humanities Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Agriculture and human values</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kim, Jungik</au><au>Goldsmith, Peter</au><au>Thomas, Michael H</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Economic impact and public costs of confined animal feeding operations at the parcel level of Craven County, North Carolina</atitle><jtitle>Agriculture and human values</jtitle><stitle>Agric Hum Values</stitle><date>2010-03-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>29</spage><epage>42</epage><pages>29-42</pages><issn>0889-048X</issn><eissn>1572-8366</eissn><abstract>Conflicts have arisen between communities and operators of confined animal feeding as farms have become bigger in order to maintain their competitiveness. These conflicts have been difficult to resolve because measuring and allocating the benefits and costs of livestock production is difficult. This papers demonstrates a policy tool for promoting compromise whereby the community gets reduced negative impacts from livestock while at the same time continues to benefit from livestock jobs, taxes, and related economic activity. Public economic benefits and public economic costs of confined animal feeding operations are estimated for every farm and affected house in Craven County, North Carolina. The results show public economic benefits of $5.7 million and public economic costs of $2.2 million, but that the ratio of benefits to costs for individual farm-house pairs varies in important ways across the 26 hog farms in Craven County.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s10460-009-9193-x</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0889-048X
ispartof Agriculture and human values, 2010-03, Vol.27 (1), p.29-42
issn 0889-048X
1572-8366
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_746294678
source Sociological Abstracts; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals
subjects Agricultural Economics
Animals
concentrated animal feeding operations
cost benefit analysis
Costs
costs and returns
Counties
Economic activity
Economic impact
Economics
Education
Ethics
Evolutionary Biology
Farmers
Farms
History
Hogs
Houses
Livestock
Livestock industry
Livestock production
Noise
Odors
Philosophy
Rural areas
rural communities
Studies
swine
Taxation
Veterinary Medicine/Veterinary Science
title Economic impact and public costs of confined animal feeding operations at the parcel level of Craven County, North Carolina
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T02%3A37%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Economic%20impact%20and%20public%20costs%20of%20confined%20animal%20feeding%20operations%20at%20the%20parcel%20level%20of%20Craven%20County,%20North%20Carolina&rft.jtitle=Agriculture%20and%20human%20values&rft.au=Kim,%20Jungik&rft.date=2010-03-01&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=29&rft.epage=42&rft.pages=29-42&rft.issn=0889-048X&rft.eissn=1572-8366&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10460-009-9193-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1945227981%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=214179453&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true