Acknowledgements. The authors are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. They also acknowledge the advice and assistance provided by Ray Chambers from the University of Wollongong, and Alistair Davidson from the Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics and Sciences.
A Comparision of Two Methods of Linking Spatial and Economic Data from Farm Surveys†
Article first published online: 12 NOV 2012
© 2012 Australian Statistical Publishing Association Inc. Published by Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics
Volume 54, Issue 3, pages 375–390, September 2012
How to Cite
Kokic, P., Lawson, K., Elliston, L., Liang, C. and Shafron, W. (2012), A Comparision of Two Methods of Linking Spatial and Economic Data from Farm Surveys. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics, 54: 375–390. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-842X.2012.00683.x
This research and the content of this article does not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics and Sciences.
- Issue published online: 20 DEC 2012
- Article first published online: 12 NOV 2012
- hedonic regression;
- opportunity cost
Linking scientific and economic data potentially has many benefits for natural resource management and policy analysis. This paper compares a sophisticated method for bringing these data together in farm surveys using detailed farm boundary data collected during an interview, with a less onerous approach requiring only a single point from each surveyed farm. A comparison is made by modelling land values using regression analysis in central New South Wales. It was found that there were only minor additional benefits from using the more sophisticated approach in this case. Additionally, there are significant costs in collecting and processing the detailed georeferencing data that make it considerably less practical than the simpler approach.