Cited 0 time in
농경지 양분수지의 개선 가치 분석:진술선호법과 대체비용법의 비교
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | 김태영 | - |
| dc.contributor.author | 박혜진 | - |
| dc.contributor.author | 김길원 | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-12-17T05:00:13Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2025-12-17T05:00:13Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2025-11 | - |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1229-3571 | - |
| dc.identifier.issn | 2287-819X | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://scholarworks.gnu.ac.kr/handle/sw.gnu/81322 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | This study estimated the public value of agricultural nutrient balance improvement using the Replacement Cost Method (RCM) and comparatively analyzed it with the pre-existing stated preference method results to explore strategies for complementary utilization of the two valuation approaches. The public value of nutrient balance improvement through the statement preference method was estimated based on the total economic value derived from the public’s willingness to pay for the environmental quality improvement effect—the ultimate outcome of nutrient balance improvement (Outcome Indicator). The RCM quantified the avoided costs (output indicators) required to clean up the reduced pollutant runoff from the recommended and standard fertilization methods using the DNDC model, thereby measuring the minimum technical value as a public value. Key research findings showed that the public benefit value estimated using the stated preference method (KRW 253.68 billion per year) was higher than the public benefit value (KRW 208.856 billion per year) derived using the replacement cost method (based on recommended fertilization and purification costs). Furthermore, the total public benefit value of the recommended fertilization method (KRW 208.856 billion based on purification costs) was approximately 1.25 times higher than that of the standard fertilization method (KRW 167.313 billion). These results suggest that the two valuation methods should be utilized complementarily. Stated preference-based values serve as benchmarks for establishing social legitimacy and long-term policy objectives. RCM values are ideal for demonstrating technical efficiency and supporting early environmental investments. This quantitative approach provides a basis for prioritizing incentives for activities to improve nutrient balance in agricultural lands, enabling the design of differentiated incentives based on factors such as areas with high potential for reducing runoff from agricultural land and precision fertilization methods. | - |
| dc.format.extent | 19 | - |
| dc.language | 한국어 | - |
| dc.language.iso | KOR | - |
| dc.publisher | 한국유기농업학회 | - |
| dc.title | 농경지 양분수지의 개선 가치 분석:진술선호법과 대체비용법의 비교 | - |
| dc.title.alternative | Analysis of the Value of Improving Farmland Nutrient Balances:A Comparison of Stated Preference and Replacement Cost Methods | - |
| dc.type | Article | - |
| dc.publisher.location | 대한민국 | - |
| dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | 한국유기농업학회지, v.33, no.4, pp 469 - 487 | - |
| dc.citation.title | 한국유기농업학회지 | - |
| dc.citation.volume | 33 | - |
| dc.citation.number | 4 | - |
| dc.citation.startPage | 469 | - |
| dc.citation.endPage | 487 | - |
| dc.type.docType | Y | - |
| dc.identifier.kciid | ART003267818 | - |
| dc.description.isOpenAccess | N | - |
| dc.description.journalRegisteredClass | kci | - |
| dc.subject.keywordAuthor | excess effluent charges | - |
| dc.subject.keywordAuthor | nutrient balance | - |
| dc.subject.keywordAuthor | public value | - |
| dc.subject.keywordAuthor | purification cost | - |
| dc.subject.keywordAuthor | replacement cost method | - |
| dc.subject.keywordAuthor | stated preference method | - |
Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
Gyeongsang National University Central Library, 501, Jinju-daero, Jinju-si, Gyeongsangnam-do, 52828, Republic of Korea+82-55-772-0532
COPYRIGHT 2022 GYEONGSANG NATIONAL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Certain data included herein are derived from the © Web of Science of Clarivate Analytics. All rights reserved.
You may not copy or re-distribute this material in whole or in part without the prior written consent of Clarivate Analytics.
