Journal of agricultural ethics

, Volume 2, Issue 2, pp 97–112 | Cite as

Economic and equity implications of land-use zoning in suburban agriculture

  • Adesoji Adelaja
  • Donn Derr
  • Karen Rose-Tank
Article

Abstract

A cash-flow viability model is used to evaluate the impacts of land-use zoning on farm households in New Jersey. Findings suggest that zoning results in increased production expenses, lower efficiency and profitability, and the devaluation of land assets. Cash flow and economic viability are, thus, reduced. Impacts of zoning on farm incomes, off-farm incomes, revenues from land sales, indebtedness, and farm sizes were not statistically significant. The results suggest that the use of land-use zoning statutes to guarantee the existence of agriculture may not be equitable unless transferable development rights or other methods of compensating farmers for their losses are simultaneously implemented.

Keywords

Economic viability cash flow land-use zoning equity agricultural preservation transfer development rights 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adelaja, A., and R. Lopez. 1986. Agricultural production choices in competitive suburban land markets: The case of New Jersey. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the Atlantic Economic Society, August 28–30, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  2. Adelaja, A., and K. Rose. 1988. Farm viability revised: A simultaneous equation cash-flow approach.Agricultural Finance Review 48:10–24.Google Scholar
  3. Akin, J. S., and I. Garfinkel, 1977. School expenditures and the economic returns to schooling.Journal of Human Resources 12:461–481.Google Scholar
  4. Ashenfelter, O., and G. Johnson. 1972. Unionsim, relative wages and labor quality in U.S. manufacturing industries.International Economic Review 13:488–508.Google Scholar
  5. Benjamin, G. 1985. The financial stress in agriculture.Economic Perspectives, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago 9(6):3–16.Google Scholar
  6. Blinder, A. S. 1976. On dogmatism in humans capital theory.Journal of Human Resources 11:9–22.Google Scholar
  7. Boissiere, J., B. Knight, and R. H. Sabot. 1985. Earnings, schooling, ability and cognitive skills.American Economic Review 75:1016–1030.Google Scholar
  8. Brubaker, S. 1977. Land: The farm horizon.American Journal of Agricultural Economics 59(5):1037–1044.Google Scholar
  9. Christian, G., Nicholson, J., and J. Towles. 1980.Economic analysis of the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan. Report prepared for the Pinelands Commission, State of New Jersey, November 20.Google Scholar
  10. Dideriksen, R., and N. Sampson. 1976. Important farmlands: A national view.Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 31(5):17–25.Google Scholar
  11. Gardner, B. 1977. The economics of agricultural land preservation.American Journal of Agricultural Economics 59(5):1027–1036.Google Scholar
  12. Hansen, D., and S. Schwartz. 1976. Prime land preservation: The California Land Preservation Act.Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 31(5):180–208.Google Scholar
  13. Huffman, W. 1980. Farm and off-farm work decisions: The role of human capital.Review Economics and Statistics 62:14–18.Google Scholar
  14. Johnson, J., K. Baum, and R. Prescott. 1985.Financial characteristics of U.S. Farms, January, 1985. Economic Research Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin No. 495, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  15. Jolly, R., and D. Doye. 1985.Farm income and financial condition of United States agriculture. FAPR1 Staff Report No. 8–85. Department of Economics, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
  16. Lee, W. 1986. The farm recession continues: Some prospects for recovery.Socio-economic information. No. 686. Ohio State Extension Service, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  17. Lines, A., and M. Morehart. 1987. Financial health of U.S. farm businesses in 1984: A region, type, and size analysis.Agricultural Finance Review 47:43–52.Google Scholar
  18. Lines, A., and C. Zulauf. 1985. Debt-to-asset ratios of Ohio farmers: A polytomous multivariate logistic regression of associated factors.Agricultural Finance Review 45:92–99.Google Scholar
  19. Lopez, R., A. Adelaja, and M. Andrews. 1988. The effects of suburbanization on agriculture.American Journal of Agricultural Economics 70(2):346–358.Google Scholar
  20. Malkiel, B., and J. Malkiel. 1973. Male-female pay differentials in professional employment.American Economic Review 63:693–705.Google Scholar
  21. Mincer, J. 1974.Schooling, experience and earnings. New York: Columbia University Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  22. O'Brian, M., and C. Hawley. 1986. The labor force participation behavior of married women under constraints on borrowing.Journal of Human Resources 21:280–296.Google Scholar
  23. Pindyck, R., and D. Rubinfeld. 1981.Econometric models and economic forecasts. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.Google Scholar
  24. Rose, K. 1986. The impact of the New Jersey Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan on the economic viability of grain, tree fruit and vegetable farms, 1984. M.S. thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
  25. Salant, P., M. Smale, and W., Saupe. 1986.Farm viability: Results of the U.S.D.A. family farm surveys. Rural Development Research Report No. 60, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  26. Smale, M., W. Saupe, and P. Salant. 1986. Farm family characteristics and the viability of farm households in Wisconsin, Mississippi, and Tennessee.Agricultural Economics Research 38(2):11–27.Google Scholar
  27. Streeter, D., and W. Saupe. 1986.Nonmonetary considerations in farm operator labor allocations. A. E. Res. 86–28, Department of Agricultural Economics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, November.Google Scholar
  28. Sumner, D. 1982. Off-farm labor supply of farmers.American Journal of Agricultural Economics 64:499–508.Google Scholar
  29. U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1985.Agricultural Statistics, 1985. Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Taylor & Francis 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adesoji Adelaja
    • 1
  • Donn Derr
    • 1
  • Karen Rose-Tank
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing RutgersThe State University of New JerseyNew Brunswick

Personalised recommendations