PS 11-133 - A survey of public preferences for rural amenities in Lincoln, Nebraska

Monday, August 6, 2012
Exhibit Hall, Oregon Convention Center
Katja Koehler-Cole, School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Omaha, NE, James R. Brandle, School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, Charles A. Francis, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE and Erin E. Blankenship, Statistics, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE
Background/Question/Methods

Agricultural land provides many ecosystem services such as clean air and water, access to locally grown foods and outdoor recreation. Often called rural amenities, they are positive externalities of agriculture, but there is little financial incentive for farmers to provide these services. As agricultural land is converted to residential and commercial developments, its ability to provide rural amenities decreases sharply. From 1960 to 2006, Lincoln’s population grew by 88% and its city area by 233%. Subsidies to farmers as well as establishing markets that capitalize on rural amenities can help preserve farmland along with its ecosystem services in Lancaster County. Essential information for any publicly funded program that targets rural amenities includes identifying the public preferences and demands. This study investigated the preferences of Lincoln residents for 8 different rural amenities and measures the frequency with which people engage in outdoor recreation, agritourism and purchasing locally grown foods. A mail survey of 1,000 households in Lincoln was conducted in 2007, using a questionnaire with both closed and open-ended questions.

Results/Conclusions

The survey achieved a response rate of 49%. Lincoln residents rated environmental amenities, especially air and water quality, higher than recreational amenities. Amenities such as scenic views and local foods were least important to Lincoln residents. The most popular outdoor recreation was walking/hiking/biking, and participants saw greater demand for opportunities to walk/hike/bike. Using contingent valuation methods, we found that people were willing to pay additional taxes for programs that enhance the provision of environmental amenities but not for programs that compensate farmers for creating opportunities for outdoor recreation on their land. Those participants that engaged frequently in outdoor recreation had significantly higher willingness-to-pay for such programs. The relatively high response rate as well as the large amount of qualitative data gathered indicates public interest in preserving and enhancing ecosystem services from rural land. Rural amenity provision in Lancaster County should focus on improving water quality, especially those of its public lakes. To enhance the provision of rural recreational amenities (outdoor recreation, agritourism), market-based approaches should be used.