Spatial Variation in Agricultural Land Prices Across Municipalities in Bukidnon

This study examined the spatial variation in agricultural land prices across the 20 municipalities and 2 component cities of Bukidnon, Philippines. Using data from 220 farmers and landowners selected through stratified random sampling, the research documented prevailing land prices and identified geographic patterns influencing valuation. Results show that agricultural land prices vary widely, with farmer-reported values ranging from ₱100,000 to ₱6,000,000 per hectare, with a provincial mean of ₱1,088,326. Higher prices were observed in municipalities with strong commercial activity, better road access, irrigation, and proximity to markets, while remote areas reported lower valuations. Land transactions were rare, reflecting strong land retention behavior and the cultural importance of land as a livelihood asset. Secure tenure, particularly titled lands, was associated with higher perceived value. Overall, the findings highlight the role of physical, locational, and institutional factors in shaping farmland prices and provide insights for land valuation and local development planning.

Agricultural land prices, Bukidnon, land valuation, spatial variation

1. Ayala, S., & Choumert-Nkolo, J. (2022). Land markets in developing countries: A review of recent empirical evidence. World Development, 150, 105708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105708 (doi.org in Bing) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ayamga, M., Yeboah, R., & Aidoo, R. (2021). Determinants of agricultural land values in Sub-Saharan Africa. Land Use Policy, 101, 105188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105188 (doi.org in Bing) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bellemare, M. F., & Bloem, J. R. (2018). Does contract farming improve welfare? A review. World Development, 112, 259–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.08.018 (doi.org in Bing) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Briones, R. M., & Israel, D. C. (2020). Agricultural land market in the Philippines: Efficiency and equity issues (PIDS Discussion Paper Series No. 2020-05). Philippine Institute for Development Studies. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Choumert-Nkolo, J., Combes Motel, P., & Le Roux, L. (2021). Institutions, land tenure, and land values in developing countries. Land Use Policy, 109, 105699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105699 (doi.org in Bing) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Ehirim, N. C., Onyenweaku, C. E., & Nwachukwu, I. N. (2017). Determinants of farmland values using hedonic pricing model. International Journal of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, 9(1), 45–55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. FAO. (2019). The state of the world’s land and water resources for food and agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Garrido, J., & Rola, A. (2018). Land tenure, property rights, and agricultural productivity in the Philippines. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, 15(2), 1–20. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Habito, C. F., & Briones, R. M. (2005). Philippine agriculture over the years: Performance, policies, and pitfalls. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, 2(1–2), 1–22. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Holden, S. T., & Ghebru, H. (2016). Land tenure reforms, tenure security, and food security in poor agrarian economies: Causal linkages and research gaps. Global Food Security, 10, 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2016.07.002 (doi.org in Bing) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Johnston, R. J., Rolfe, J., Rosenberger, R. S., & Brouwer, R. (2017). Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: A guide for researchers and practitioners. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kuckartz, U., & Rädiker, S. (2019). Analyzing qualitative data with MAXQDA. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Lawry, S., Samii, C., Hall, R., Leopold, A., Hornby, D., & Mtero, F. (2017). The impact of land property rights interventions on investment and agricultural productivity in developing countries: A systematic review. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 9(1), 61–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/19439342.2016.1160947 (doi.org in Bing) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Ma, X., Heerink, N., van Ierland, E., & Shi, X. (2020). Farmland values and agricultural productivity: Evidence from rural China. China Economic Review, 62, 101504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2020.101504 (doi.org in Bing) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Philippine Statistics Authority. (2023). Agricultural indicators system: Land use and land classification. PSA. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Riera, P., Signorello, G., Thiene, M., & Mahieu, P. (2022). Sample size and statistical power in hedonic pricing models. Ecological Economics, 193, 107308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107308 (doi.org in Bing) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Robinson, O. C. (2014). Sampling in qualitative research: Principles and practices. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 11(1), 25–41. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Rola, A. C., Francisco, H., & Tiongco, M. (2021). Agribusiness expansion and land-use change in Mindanao. Journal of Environmental Science and Management, 24(1), 45–58. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Seetharaman, P. (2016). Purposive sampling in qualitative research. International Journal of Research and Methodology, 3(2), 1–6. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Shaw, I. (1999). Qualitative evaluation. Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Tian, X., Wang, S., & Chen, Y. (2021). Infrastructure development and agricultural land values in Southeast Asia. Land Use Policy, 108, 105534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105534 (doi.org in Bing) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Wang, J., Mendelsohn, R., & Dinar, A. (2022). Climate variability and agricultural land values: Global evidence. Environmental and Resource Economics, 81, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-021-00568-4 (doi.org in Bing) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Zhang, Y., Mishra, A. K., & Zhu, P. (2019). The effects of transportation infrastructure on farmland values: Evidence from China. Land Use Policy, 81, 412–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.10.047 (doi.org in Bing) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Impact of Foreign Direct Investment in India
• Issues Involved in Digitalisation Special Reference to Indian Tourism Growth
• Relationship Marketing and Customer Loyalty in the Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) Industry in Nairobi County
• Financial Literacy or Financial Inclusion? Which is Which, What is What—To Achieve Uganda’s 10-Fold Economic Growth By 2040
• Harnessing Natural Gas for Economic Transformation: Overcoming the Regulatory and Infrastructural Bottlenecks in Nigeria