Social legitimacy issues in the provision of non-commodity outputs from Rural Development Programs |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Cantabrian Agricultural Research Centre (CIFA), C/ Héroes 2 de Mayo 27, 39600 Muriedas, Cantabria, Spain;2. Department of Applied Economics, University of Vigo, Lagoas-Marcosende s/n, 36310 Vigo, Spain;3. Forest Research Centre (CIFOR), National Institute for Agriculture and Food Research and Technology (INIA), Ctra. de La Coruña km. 7.5, 28040 Madrid, Spain;4. Sustainable Forest Management Research Institute, University of Valladolid-INIA, Avda. de Madrid 57, 34004 Palencia, Spain;1. Laboratório de Acarologia, Tecnovates, Universidade do Vale do Taquari, UNIVATES, 95900-000, Lajeado, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil;2. CNPq Researcher, Brazil;1. Department of Anesthesiology, General Hospital of Chengdu Military Region of PLA, 270 Rongdu Road, Chengdu 610083, China;2. Center of Cardiovascular Surgery, Guangzhou General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Command, 111 Liuhua Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510010, China;1. Department of Urology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany;2. Department of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece;3. Department of Urology, Gartnavel General Hospital, Glasgow, United Kingdom;1. Aix-Marseille Univ., CNRS, EHESS, Centrale Marseille, AMSE, 5 Boulevard Maurice Bourdet CS50498, 13205, Marseille Cedex 01, France;2. Université de Toulon and Aix-Marseille School of Economics (AMSE), 5 Boulevard Maurice Bourdet CS50498, 13205, Marseille Cedex 01, France;3. Aix-Marseille Univ., CNRS, EHESS, Centrale Marseille, AMSE and IDEP, 5 Boulevard Maurice Bourdet CS50498, 13205, Marseille Cedex 01, France;1. The National Centre for Priority Setting in Health Care, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, SE-581 83 Linköping, Sweden;2. National Institute for the Study of Ageing and Later Life, Department of Social and Welfare Studies, Linköping University, SE-581 83 Linköping, Sweden |
| |
| Abstract: | This article deals with the issues of welfare measurement and preference heterogeneity for Rural Development Programs (RDPs) in Cantabria, Spain. People from urban and rural localities would benefit from improvements in the provision of public goods and externalities promoted by RDPs, but their preferences may be quite different. Heterogeneous preferences between urban and rural dwellers would hinder the proper estimation and aggregation of social welfare. Results show significant differences between rural and urban residents. However, the social legitimacy of RDPs, in terms of positive welfare changes, would prevail in both rural and urban settings. The article concludes that accurately measuring social welfare values and explaining preference patterns is a key issue for developing effective multifunctional policies. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
