Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring spatial patterns of farmland transactions and farmland use changes

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Strong economic incentives stimulate the conversion of farmland to non-farm uses possessing higher economic benefits, and rising land values can result in further conversions in the surrounding areas. However, previous studies focused exclusively on the analysis of attribute data, without concern for location or geographic information. Our study focuses on the application of spatial analysis method by exploring the magnitude and patterns of farmland use changes and farmland transactions in Tainan County in southwestern Taiwan. The results show that farmland use changes and transactions appear to cluster in specific locations—near urban planning areas, industrial parks, and science parks. Clustered farmland use changes indicate both excessive development of some farmland and possible protection of other farmland, while clustered farmland transactions indicate potential pressure for future conversion to non-farming uses. Overall, the spatial analyses indicate (without necessarily implying a cause-and-effect relationship) that the greater the farmland use change, the greater the number of farmland transactions. This approach to exploring the spatial patterns in and the interaction between farmland use change and farmland transactions can be applied to other regions facing increasing competition for farmland conversions and may be a useful tool for monitoring both urban expansion and increased farmland transactions. These occurrences should be closely monitored by governments to avoid excessive loss of farmland.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The average farm size in Taiwan is approximately 1 ha per household. According to the average farm size, Taiwanese farmers have been regarded as peasants (Chang et al. 2014a, b; Ethical Trading Initiative 2005).

References

  • Abelairas-Etxebarria, P., & Astorkiza, I. (2012). Farmland prices and land-use changes in periurban protected natural areas. Land Use Policy, 29, 674–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adelaja, A., Sullivan, K., & Hailu, Y. G. (2011). Endogenizing the planning horizon in urban fringe agriculture. Land Use Policy, 28(1), 66–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alig, R. J., Kline, J. D., & Lichtenstein, M. (2004). Urbanization on the US landscape: looking ahead in the 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69, 219–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Androkovich, R. A. (2010). British Columbia’s agricultural land reserve: Economic, legal and political issues. Land Use Policy, 30, 365–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anselin, L. (1995). Local indicators of spatial association-LISA. Geographical Analysis, 27(2), 93–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, K. (2006). Baker review of land use planning: Final report. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, C. R., & Johnston, T. R. R. (1992). Agriculture in the City’s Countryside. Toronto: University of Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, H. S., Chen, T. L., & Chen, P. C. (2014a). Explore the spatial relationship between Farmland use changes and farmland transactions. Journal of Architecture and Planning, 14(2/3), 167–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, Y. C., Lee, P. P., & Kan, C. E. (2014b). Farm-level land diversity of smallholders with limited input resources during urbanization in Taiwan. Paddy and Water Environment, 12, 155–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheshire, P. (1995). On the price of land and the value of amenities. Economica, 62, 247–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cliff, A. D., & Ord, J. K. (1973). Spatial Autocorrelation. London: Pion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cliff, A. D., & Ord, J. K. (1981). Spatial Processes. London: Pion.

    Google Scholar 

  • David, W. S., & Wang, J. L. (2005). Statistical Analysis of Geographic Information with ArcView GIS And ArcGIS. USA: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drescher, K., Henderson, J., & McNamara, K. (2001). Farmland prices determinants. In: Proceedings of American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting Chicago, IL.

  • Drozd, D., & Johnson, B. (2004). Dynamics of a rural land market experiencing farmland conversion to acreages: The case of Saunders County, Nebraska. Land Economics, 80(2), 294–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, J. M., & Aull-Hyde, R. (2002). Identifying public preferences for land preservation using the analytic hierarchy process. Ecological Economics, 42, 131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EEA (European Environment Agency). (2006). Urban Sprawl in Europe-The Ignored Challenge. Luxembourg: European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elad, R. L., Clifton, I. D., & Epperson, J. E. (1994). Hedonic estimation applied to the farmland market, Georgia. Journal of Agricultural & Applied Economics, 26(6), 351–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ethical Trading Initiative. (2005). ETI smallholder guidelines. Cromwell House, London.

  • Falk, B. (1991). Formally testing the present value model of farmland prices. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 73(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guiling, P., Brorsen, B. W., & Doye, D. (2009). Effect of urban proximity on agricultural land values. Land Economics, 85, 252–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houston, P. (2005). Re-valuing the fringe: some findings on the value of agricultural production in Australia’s periurban regions. Geographical Research, 43(2), 209–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, H., Miller, Y., Sherrick, B. J., & Gómez, M. I. (2006). Factors influencing Illinois farmland values. American Agricultural Economics Association, 88(2), 458–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, J., & Wichelns, D. (1996). Public preferences regarding the goals of farmland preservation programs. Land Economics, 72, 538–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. L. (2001). Developing a bivariate spatial association measure: An integration of Pearson's r and Moran's I. Journal of Geographical Systems, 3, 369–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. J., Fang, Y. R., & Liao, B. C. (2011). Attitude towards agricultural land functions in taiwan: a comparative study of the general public and farmers and of spatial difference. Journal of Taiwan Land Research, 14(1), 29–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenberg, E., & Ding, C. (2008). Assessing farmland protection policy in China. Land Use Policy, 25, 59–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paül, V., & McKenzie, F. H. (2010). Agricultural areas under metropolitan threats: lessons for Perth from Barcelona. In G. W. Luck, D. Race, & R. Black (Eds.), Demographic Change in Australia’s Rural Landscapes (pp. 125–152). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Paül, V., & McKenzie, F. H. (2013). Periurban farmland conservation and development of alternative food networks: Insights from a case-study area in metropolitan Barcelona (Catalonia, Spain). Land Use Policy, 30(1), 94–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pendall, R., Martin, J., & Fulton, W. (2002). Holding the line: Urban containment in the United States. Washington: The Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plantinga, A. J., & Miller, D. J. (2001). Agricultural land values and the value of rights to future land development. Land Economics, 77(1), 56–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pyle, L. A. (1985). The land market beyond the urban fringe. Geographical Reviews, 75(1), 32–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renwick, A., Jansson, T., Verburg, P. H., Revoredo-Giha, C., Britz, W., Gocht, A., & McCracken, D. (2013). Policy reform and agricultural land abandonment in the EU. Land Use Policy, 30(1), 446–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roose, A., Kull, A., Gauk, M., & Tali, T. (2013). Land use policy shocks in the post-communist urban fringe: A case study of Estonia. Land Use Policy, 30(1), 76–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberger, R. S. (1998). Public preferences regarding the goals of farmland preservation programs: comment. Land Economics, 74(4), 557–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI). (2001). A new vision for planning: Delivering sustainable communities, An agenda for action. London: RTPI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sklenicka, P., Molnarova, K., Pixova, K. C., & Salek, M. E. (2013). Factors affecting farmland prices in the Czech Republic. Land Use Policy, 30(1), 130–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sokal, R. R., & Oden, N. L. (1978). Spatial autocorrelation in biology 1. Methodology. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 10(2), 199–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, P. A., & Libby, L. W. (1998). Determinants of farmland value: the case of DeKalb County, Illinois. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 20(1), 80–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorson, J. A. (1994). Zoning Policy Change and the Urban Fringe Land Market. Journal of the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, 22(3), 527–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobler, W. R. (1970). A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region. Economic Geography, 46(supplement), 234–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kooten, C. (1993). Land resource economics and sustainable development: Economic policies and the common good. Vancouver: UBC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Variyam, J. N., Jordan, J. L., & Epperson, J. E. (1990). Preferences of citizens for agricultural policies: evidence from a national survey. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 72(2), 257–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y., & Scott, S. (2008). Illegal farmland conversion in China’s urban periphery: Local regime and national transitions. Urban Geography, 29(4), 327–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., Chen, Y., Shao, X., Zhang, Y., & Cao, Y. (2012). Land-use changes and policy dimension driving forces in China: Present, trend and future. Land Use Policy, 29(4), 737–749.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urban Planning, National Cheng-Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan

    Hsueh-Sheng Chang & Tzu-Ling Chen

Authors
  1. Hsueh-Sheng Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tzu-Ling Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tzu-Ling Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chang, HS., Chen, TL. Exploring spatial patterns of farmland transactions and farmland use changes. Environ Monit Assess 187, 596 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-015-4825-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-015-4825-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation