Abstract
In some respects the idea that the landscape can be priced may appear groundless. The landscape is often associated with cultural and emotional values derived from its aesthetic enjoyment, values which seem absolutely impossible to quantify. On the contrary, several studies both in Italy and abroad have suggested that people have well defined and measurable preferences on rural landscapes (Daniel and Booster 1976; Anderson 1981; Buhyoff et al., 1982; Brown and Daniel, 1986; Gobster and Chenoweth, 1989; Eleftriadis and Tsalikidis, 1990; Brown and Daniel, 1991; Angilieri and Toccolini, 1993; Gregory and Davis, 1993; Tempesta, 1993).
Research supported by the Italian National Research Council, RAISA Project, Sub-Project 1 «Agricultural Systems and Environment», Research Unit of the University of Trieste.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anderson, L.M., 1981. Land Use Destinations Affects Perception of Scenic Beauty in Forest Landscapes.Forest Science27 (2): 392–400.
Angileri, V., and Toccolini, A., 1993. The Assessment of Visual Quality as a tool for the Conservation of Rural Landscape Diversity.Landscape and Urban Planning24: 105–112.
Boyle, K.J, Bishop, R.C., 1988. Welfare Measurement Using Contingent Valuation: A Comparison of Techniques.American Journal of Agricultural Economics70 (1): 20–28.
Braden, J.B., and Lovejoy, S.B., (eds.) 1990.Agriculture and Water Quality. International Perspectives.London: Lynne Rienner Publisher.
Brown, T., and Daniel, T., 1986. Predicting Scenic Beauty of Timber Stands.Forest Science32 (2): 471–87.
Brown, T., and Daniel, T., 1991. Landscape aesthetics of riparian environments: relationship of flow quantity to scenic quality along a wild and scenic river.Water ResourcesResearch27 (8): 1787–95.
Buhyoff, G.J., and Leuschner, W.A., 1978. Estimating Psychological Disutility from Damaged Forest Stands.Forest Science24 (3): 424–32.
Buhyoff, G.J., Wellman, J.D., and Daniel, T.C., 1982. Predicting Scenic Quality for Mountain Pine Beetle and Western Spruce Budwonn Damaged Forest Vistas.Forest Science28 (4): 827–38.
Daniel, T.C., and Booster, R.S., 1976. “Measuring Landscape Aesthetics: The Scenic Beauty Estimation Method”. USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM/167, May.
Drake, L., 1992. The Non-Market Value of The Swedish Agricultural Landscape.European Review Agricultural Economics19: 351–364.
Elefthriadis, N., and Tsalikidis, I., 1990. Coastal Pine Forest Landscapes: Modeling Scenic Beauty for Forest Management.Journal of Environmenkil Management30 (1): 47–62.
Gobster, P.H., and Chenoweth, RE., 1989. The Dimensions of Aesthetic Preference: A Quantitative Analysis.Journal of Environmental Management29: 47–72.
Gregory, K.J., and Davis, R.J., 1993. The Perception of Riverscape Aesthetics: An Example From Two Hampshire Rivers.Journal of Environmental Management39: 171–85.
Hanely, N., (ed.) 1991.Farming and the Countryside: An Economic Analysis of External Cost and Benefits.London: CAB International.
Hull, B.R. IV, and Buhyoff, G.J., 1986. The Scenic Beauty Temporal Distribution Method: an Attempt to Make Scenic Beauty Assessment Compatible with Forest Planning Efforts.Forest Science32 (2): 271–286
Marinelli, A., Casini, L., and Romano, D., 1990. Valutazione economica dell’impatto aggregato e dei benefici diretti della ricreazione all’aperto di un parco naturale della Toscana.Genio Rurale(9).
Merlo, M., and Signorello, G., 1991. “Alternative Estimates of Outdoor Recreation Benefits in Italy”. IUFRO Working Party on “Evaluation of Unpriced Social Benefits Created by Forest Enterprises”, Gottingen, 22–24 May.
Romano, D., 1990. Tempo e domanda di ricreazione all’aria aperta.Studi di economia e di diritto(1): 159–86.
Romano, D., and Carbone, F., 1993. La valutazione economica dei benefici ambientali: un confronto fra approcci non di mercato.Rivista di economia agraria(1).
Ruckelshaus, W.D., 1989. Verso un futuro compatibile con l’ambiente.Le Scienze255.
Signorello, G., 1990. La soma dei benefici di tutela di un’area naturale: un’applicazione della “Contingent Valuation”.Genio Rurale(9): 55–66.
Signorello, 1994. Valutazione contingente della disponibilità a pagare, per la fruizione di un bene ambientale: modelli parametrici e non parametrici.Rivista di economia agraria(2).
Tempesta, T., 1993. “La valutazione del paesaggio nella pianificazione territoriale”. In Franceschetti, G., and Tempesta, T., (eds.)La pianificazione del territorio rurale del Veneto negli anni Ottanta.Padova: Unipress.
Tempesta, T., 1995. “Paesaggio rurale e processi innovativi nel settore primario. Una ricerca nella pianura tra Isonzo e Tagliamento”. (Mimeo).
Venzi, L, and Rivetti, M., 1989. La valutazione di un giardino con peculiari caratteristiche architettoniche e paesaggistiche: il Giardino di Ninfa.Genio Rurale(9): 76–85.
Walsh, R.G., Ward, F., and Olienyk, J., 1989. Recreational Demand for Trees in National Forests.Journal of Environmental Management28: 255–269.
Walsh, R.G., Bjonback, R.D., Aiken, R.A., and Rosenthal D.H., 1990. Estimating the Public Benefit of Protecting Forest Quality.Journal of Environmental Management30: 175–89.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tempesta, T. (1998). The Economic Value of Rural Landscape: An Application to the Area Between Isonzo and Tagliamento Rivers (Friuli-Venezia Giulia). In: Bishop, R.C., Romano, D. (eds) Environmental Resource Valuation. Studies in Risk and Uncertainty, vol 11. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5741-8_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5741-8_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-7630-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-5741-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive