|
|
“Heterogeneous impact of soil contamination on farmland prices in the Belgian Campine region : evidence from unconditional quantile regressions”. Peeters L, Schreurs E, Van Passel S, Environmental &, Resource Economics 66, 135 (2017). http://doi.org/10.1007/S10640-015-9945-6
Abstract: We estimate a hedonic-pricing model using geo-coded farmland-transaction data from the Campine region, situated in the north-east of Belgium. Unlike previous hedonic studies, we use the method of unconditional quantile regression (Firpo et al., in Econometrica 77(3):953973, 2009). An important advantage of this new method over the traditional conditional quantile regression (Koenker and Bassett, in Econometrica 46(1):3350, 1978) is that it allows for the estimation of potentially heterogeneous effects of cadmium pollution along the entire (unconditional) distribution of farmland prices. Using a threshold specification of the hedonic-pricing model, we find evidence of a U-shaped valuation pattern, where cadmium pollution of the soil has a negative and significant impact on prices only in the middle range of the distribution, insofar as cadmium concentrations are above the regulatory standard of 2 parts per million for agricultural land. Results obtained from a probit model to classify land plots into different price segments further suggest that the heterogeneous impact of soil pollution on price can be directly related to the variety of amenities that farmland provides.
Keywords: A1 Journal article; Economics; Engineering Management (ENM)
Impact Factor: 1.582
Times cited: 4
DOI: 10.1007/S10640-015-9945-6
|
|
|
|
“Farmers' perceived cost of land use restrictions : a simulated purchasing decision using discrete choice experiments”. Lizin S, Van Passel S, Schreurs E, Land Use Policy 46, 115 (2015). http://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2015.02.006
Abstract: This paper reports on the findings from discrete choice experiments designed to estimate farmers perceived costs of land use restrictions, i.e. crop restrictions, additional fertilizing restrictions, and usage restrictions, as opposed to having no such restrictions. To this end, hypothetical land purchasing decisions were simulated based on the information about productivity, lot size, distance to other land, driving time to home, land use restrictions, and price. Farmers from the Campine area (Belgium) were invited to participate in the survey as the agricultural land in this region still faces the effects of historical heavy metal contamination resulting in crop restrictions. For identical pieces of land, we estimate the perceived cost, calculated as a change in the consumer surplus due to having a land use restriction, to be about 46,000 /ha for the crop restriction, 50,000 /ha for the usage restriction, and 70,000 /ha for the fertilizing restrictions. Assuming this cost to represent a perpetuity, then with a discount rate of 5% the yearly fixed costs respectively equal about 2300 /ha, 2500 /ha, and 3500 /ha.
Keywords: A1 Journal article; Economics; Engineering Management (ENM)
Impact Factor: 3.089
Times cited: 12
DOI: 10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2015.02.006
|
|
|
|
“Determining potential locations for biomass valorization using a macro screening approach”. Van Dael M, Van Passel S, Pelkmans L, Guisson R, Swinnen G, Schreurs E, Biomass &, Bioenergy 45, 175 (2012). http://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOMBIOE.2012.06.001
Abstract: European policy states that by 2020 at least 20% of final energy consumption should come from renewable energy sources. Biomass as a renewable energy source cannot be disregarded in order to attain this target. In this study a macro screening approach is developed to determine potential locations for biomass valorization in a specified region. The approach consists of five steps: (1) criteria determination, (2) data gathering, (3) weight assignment, (4) final score, (5) spatial representation. The resulting outcome provides a first well balanced scan of the possibilities for energy production using regional biomass. This way policy makers and investors can be supported and motivated to study the possibilities of building energy production plants at specific locations in more detail, which can be described as a 'micro-screening'. In our case study the approach is applied to determine the potentially interesting locations to establish a biomass project. The region has been limited to the forty-four communities in the province of Limburg (Belgium). The macro screening approach has shown to be very effective since the amount of interesting locations has been reduced drastically. (c) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: A1 Journal article; Engineering sciences. Technology; Engineering Management (ENM)
Impact Factor: 3.219
Times cited: 23
DOI: 10.1016/J.BIOMBIOE.2012.06.001
|
|
|
|
“Phytoremediation, a sustainable remediation technology? 2 : economic assessment of CO2 abatement through the use of phytoremediation crops for renewable energy production”. Witters N, Mendelsohn R, Van Passel S, Van Slycken S, Weyens N, Schreurs E, Meers E, Tack F, Vanheusden B, Vangronsveld J, Biomass &, Bioenergy 39, 470 (2012). http://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOMBIOE.2011.11.017
Abstract: Phytoremediation could be a sustainable remediation alternative for conventional remediation technologies. However, its implementation on a commercial scale remains disappointing. To emphasize its sustainability, this paper examines whether and how the potential economic benefit of CO2 abatement for different crops used for phytoremediation or sustainable land management purposes could promote phytotechnologies. Our analysis is based on a case study in the Campine region, where agricultural soils are contaminated with mainly cadmium. We use Life Cycle Analysis to show for the most relevant crops (willow (Salix spp), energy maize (Zea mays), and rapeseed (Brassica napus)), that phytoremediation, used for renewable energy production, could abate CO2. Converting this in economic numbers through the Marginal Abatement Cost of CO2 ( 20 ton−1) we can integrate this in the economic analysis to compare phytoremediation crops among each other, and phytoremediation with conventional technologies. The external benefit of CO2 abatement when using phytoremediation crops for land management ranges between 55 and 501 per hectare. The purpose of these calculations is not to calculate a subsidy for phytoremediation. There is no reason why one would prefer phytoremediation crops for renewable energy production over normal biomass. Moreover, subsidies for renewable energy already exist. Therefore, we should not integrate these numbers in the economic analysis again. However, these numbers could contribute to making explicit the competitive advantage of phytoremediation compared to conventional remediation technologies, but also add to a more sustainably funded decision on which crop should be grown on contaminated land.
Keywords: A1 Journal article; Economics; Engineering Management (ENM)
Impact Factor: 3.219
Times cited: 38
DOI: 10.1016/J.BIOMBIOE.2011.11.017
|
|
