Research Article

Econometric Analysis of Landscape Preferences in Canterbury, New Zealand

Table 4

Visual assessment study.

VariableUnitRuralUrban
EstimateStd. err.EstimateStd. err.

Shelterbelt in imageDummy0.73***(0.051)0.62***(0.035)
Distant shelterbeltDummy0.34***(0.038)0.36***(0.026)
Individual treesDummy0.19***(0.037)0.14***(0.025)
SheepDummy0.62***(0.056)0.46***(0.038)
Beef cattleDummy−0.0032(0.056)−0.089**(0.038)
Dairy cowsDummy−0.34***(0.044)−0.28***(0.030)
HorticultureDummy0.38***(0.038)0.25***(0.026)
IrrigatorDummy−0.91***(0.050)−0.86***(0.034)
Silage balesDummy−0.33***(0.050)−0.33***(0.034)
Overgrown vergeDummy−0.15***(0.030)−0.14***(0.020)
Electric/telephone polesDummy−0.035(0.031)−0.037*(0.021)
HillsDummy0.11***(0.032)0.074***(0.022)
MaleDummy−0.0087(0.080)0.036(0.063)
AgeYears0.0081**(0.0033)0.00021(0.0025)
Non-Māori NZ’erDummy−0.056(0.13)−0.15(0.095)
MāoriDummy−0.10(0.26)−0.31*(0.16)
Canterbury residencyYears−0.00019(0.0024)0.0016(0.0020)
Farm familyDummy0.095(0.11)0.039(0.16)
Outdoors activitiesDummy0.025(0.13)−0.046(0.074)
Constant−0.082(0.25)0.41***(0.15)

Number of groups244494
Obs. per group 3838

Notes: Maximum likelihood model estimated using cross-classified random effects. Standard errors reported in parentheses. ***Significant at the 1% level; **significant at the 5% level; *significant at the 10% level.