Agriculture and Solar Farms

References

1. 1. Allcott, Hunt, and
   2. Christopher Knittel.

   2019. Are consumers poorly informed about fuel economy? evidence from two experiments. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 11 (1): 1–37.

   OpenUrl
2. Arevon Energy. (2024, October 28). Benefits of utility-scale solar energy. Retrieved from https://arevonenergy.com/news/blog/benefits-of-utility-scale-solar-energy/.
3. 1. Beck, Matthew J,
   2. Simon Fifer, and
   3. John M Rose.

   2016. Can you ever be certain? reducing hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments via respondent reported choice certainty. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 89: 149–167.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
4. 1. Bohner, Gerd, and
   2. Nina Dickel.

   2011. Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology 62: 391–417.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 1. Bolinger, Mark, and
   2. Greta Bolinger.

   2022. Land requirements for utility-scale PV: an empirical update on power and energy density. IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics, 12(2), 589-594.

   OpenUrl
6. 1. Boudet, Hilary S.

   2019. Public perceptions of and responses to new energy technologies. Nature Energy 4 (6): 446–455.

   OpenUrl
7. 1. Brant, Rollin.

   1990. Assessing proportionality in the proportional odds model for ordinal logistic regression. Biometrics: 1171–1178.
8. Bright Future Iowa. (2022, February 8). The Tarrance Group survey memo. Retrieved from https://brightfutureiowa.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Iowa-Summary-Memo_final-Copy.pdf.
9. 1. Burke, Paul J,
   2. Jinnie Widnyana,
   3. Zeba Anjum,
   4. Emma Aisbett,
   5. Budy Resosudarmo, and
   6. Kenneth GH Baldwin.

   2019. Overcoming barriers to solar and wind energy adoption in two Asian giants: India and Indonesia. Energy Policy 132: 1216–1228.

   OpenUrl
10. 1. Carlisle, Juliet E,
    2. David Solan,
    3. Stephanie L Kane, and
    4. Jeffrey Joe.

    2016. Utility-scale solar and public attitudes toward siting: A critical examination of proximity. Land Use Policy 58: 491–501.

    OpenUrl
11. 1. Carlsson, Fredrik,
    2. Peter Frykblom, and
    3. Carl Johan Lagerkvist.

    2007. Consumer willingness to pay for farm animal welfare: mobile abattoirs versus transportation to slaughter. European Review of Agricultural Economics 34 (3): 321–344.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
12. 1. Carson, Richard T., and
    2. Mikołaj Czajkowski.

    2019. A new baseline model for estimating willingness to pay from discrete choice models. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 95: 57-61.

    OpenUrl
13. 1. Chen, Jian,
    2. Hongli Feng,
    3. Elizabeth Hoffman, and
    4. Luke Seaberg.

    2025. Support for utility-scale solar: Effects of information and heterogeneity among public officials, the general population, and landowners. Journal of Environmental Management 377: 124574.

    OpenUrlPubMed
14. 1. Choi, Andy S,
    2. Stefan Gössling, and
    3. Brent W Ritchie.

    2018. Flying with climate liability? Economic valuation of voluntary carbon offsets using forced choices. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 62: 225–235.

    OpenUrl
15. 1. Cohen, Jacob.

    2013. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Academic press.
16. 1. Crago, Christine Lasco, and
    2. Ilya Chernyakhovskiy.

    2017. Are policy incentives for solar power effective? evidence from residential installations in the northeast. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 81: 132–151.

    OpenUrl
17. 1. Crawford, Jessica,
    2. Douglas Bessette, and
    3. Sarah B Mills.

    2022. Rallying the anti-crowd: Organized opposition, democratic deficit, and a potential social gap in large-scale solar energy. Energy Research & Social Science 90: 102597.

    OpenUrl
18. 1. Delicado, Ana,
    2. Elisabete Figueiredo, and
    3. Luís Silva.

    2016. Community perceptions of renewable energies in Portugal: Impacts on environment, landscape and local development. Energy Research & Social Science 13: 84–93.

    OpenUrl
19. 1. Elmallah, Salma,
    2. Ben Hoen,
    3. K. Sydny Fujita,
    4. Dana Robson, and
    5. Eric Brunner.

    2023. Shedding light on large-scale solar impacts: An analysis of property values and proximity to photovoltaics across six US states. Energy Policy, 175, p.113425.

    OpenUrl
20. 1. Faiers, Adam, and
    2. Charles Neame.

    2006. Consumer attitudes towards domestic solar power systems. Energy policy 34 (14): 1797–1806.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
21. Farm Progress. (2022, August 15). Solar factors into loss of prime farmland. Retrieved from https://www.farmprogress.com/commentary/solar-factors-into-loss-of-prime-farmland.
22. 1. Fiebig, Denzil G.,
    2. Michael P. Keane,
    3. Jordan Louviere, and
    4. Nada Wasi.

    2010. The generalized multinomial logit model: accounting for scale and coefficient heterogeneity. Marketing Science 29 (3): 393-421.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
23. 1. Finney, D. J.

    1971. A statistical treatment of the sigmoid response curve. Probit analysis. Cambridge University Press, London 633.
24. 1. Frate, Claudio Albuquerque, and
    2. Christian Brannstrom.

    2017. Stakeholder subjectivities regarding barriers and drivers to the introduction of utility-scale solar photovoltaic power in Brazil. Energy Policy 111: 346–352.

    OpenUrl
25. 1. Freeman III, A Myrick,
    2. Joseph A Herriges, and
    3. Catherine L Kling.

    2014. The measurement of environmental and resource values: theory and methods. Routledge.
26. 1. Gadzanku, Sika,
    2. Wenrui Qu,
    3. Shahzeen Z. Attari,
    4. Parrish Bergquist,
    5. Sanya Carley,
    6. Alison Knasin,
    7. David M. Konisky,
    8. Gilbert Michaud, and
    9. Jennifer Silva.

    2025. Public attitudes and community engagement in large-scale solar siting. Environmental Research Letters, 20(11), p.113001.

    OpenUrl
27. 1. Gaur, Vasundhara, and
    2. Corey Lang.

    2023. House of the rising sun: The effect of utility-scale solar arrays on housing prices. Energy Economics, 122, p.106699.

    OpenUrl
28. 1. Gaur, Vasundhara,
    2. Corey Lang,
    3. Gregory Howard, and
    4. Ruth Quainoo.

    2023. When energy issues are land use issues: estimating preferences for utility-scale solar energy siting. Land Economics 99 (3): 343–363.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
29. 1. Greene, William H.

    2003. Econometric analysis. Pretence Hall.
30. 1. Greene, William H, and
    2. David A Hensher.

    2010. Modeling ordered choices: A primer. Cambridge University Press.
31. 1. Hanger, Susanne,
    2. Nadejda Komendantova,
    3. Boris Schinke,
    4. Driss Zejli,
    5. Ahmed Ihlal, and
    6. Anthony Patt.

    2016. Community acceptance of large-scale solar energy installations in developing countries: Evidence from Morocco. Energy Research & Social Science 14: 80–89.

    OpenUrl
32. 1. Hensher, David A,
    2. Andrew T Collins, and
    3. William Greene.

    2013. Accounting for attribute nonattendance and common-metric aggregation in a probabilistic decision process mixed multinomial logit model: A warning on potential confounding. Transportation, 40(5), 1003-1020.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
33. 1. Hensher, David,
    2. Nina Shore, and
    3. Kenneth Train.

    2005. Households’ willingness to pay for water service attributes. Environmental and Resource Economics 32: 509–531.

    OpenUrl
34. 1. Herriges, Joseph,
    2. Catherine Kling,
    3. Chih-Chen Liu, and
    4. Justin Tobias.

    2010. What are the consequences of consequentiality? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 59 (1): 67–81.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
35. 1. Hirschberg, Joe, and
    2. Jenny Lye.

    2010. A Geometric Comparison of the Delta and Fieller Confidence Intervals. The American Statistician 64 (3): 234–41.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
36. 1. Hofstede, Stefanie N,
    2. Leti van Bodegom-Vos,
    3. Manon M Wentink,
    4. Carmen LA Vleggeert-Lankamp,
    5. Thea PM Vliet Vlieland,
    6. Perla J Marang-van de Mheen,

    and DISC Study Group. 2014. Most important factors for the implementation of shared decision making in sciatica care: Ranking among professionals and patients. PloS one 9 (4): e94176.

    OpenUrlPubMed
37. 1. Holmes, Thomas P,
    2. Wiktor L Adamowicz, and
    3. Fredrik Carlsson.

    2017. Choice experiments. A primer on nonmarket valuation: 133–186.
38. Iowa Farmer Today. 2021. Too early to tell how solar farms impact land value. Retrieved from https://agupdate.com/iowafarmertoday/news/state-and-regional/too-early-to-tell-how-solar-farms-impact-land-value/article_1aa9cf14-bd94-11eb-af18-af769bd02582.html.
39. Iowa Solar Energy Trade Association. 2020. Iowa Solar Energy Fact Sheet. Retrieved from https://www.iaenvironment.org/webres/File/Iowa%20Solar%20Energy%20Fact%20Sheet%20January%202020.pdf.
40. Iowa State University Extension and Outreach (ISU Extension). 2022. Cash Rental Rates for Iowa 2022 Survey. Retrieved from https://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm//wholefarm/pdf/c2-10_2022.pdf.
41. 1. Jager, Wander.

    2006. Stimulating the diffusion of photovoltaic systems: A behavioural perspective. Energy Policy 34 (14): 1935–1943.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
42. 1. Johnston, Robert J.,
    2. Kevin J. Boyle,
    3. Wiktor Adamowicz,
    4. Jeff Bennett,
    5. Roy Brouwer,
    6. Trudy Ann Cameron,
    7. W. Michael Hanemann et al.

    2017. Contemporary guidance for stated preference studies. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists 4 (2): 319-405.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
43. 1. Kalkbrenner, Bernhard J, and
    2. Jutta Roosen.

    2016. Citizens’ willingness to participate in local renewable energy projects: The role of community and trust in Germany. Energy Research & Social Science 13: 60–70.

    OpenUrl
44. 1. Krosnick, Jon A.

    1991. Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied cognitive psychology 5 (3): 213–236.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
45. 1. Ku, Yu-Cheng,
    2. Tsun-Feng Chiang, and
    3. Sheng-Mao Chang.

    2017. Is what you choose what you want?—outlier detection in choice-based conjoint analysis. Marketing letters 28: 29–42.

    OpenUrl
46. 1. Ku, Yu-Cheng, and
    2. John Wu.

    2018. Measuring respondent uncertainty in discrete choice experiments via utility suppression. Journal of Choice Modelling 27: 1–18.

    OpenUrl
47. 1. Lancsar, Emily, and
    2. Jordan Louviere.

    2006. Deleting ‘irrational’ responses from discrete choice experiments: a case of investigating or imposing preferences?. Health economics, 15(8), 797-811.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
48. 1. Lancsar, Emily, and
    2. Jordan Louviere.

    2008. Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user’s guide. Pharmacoeconomics 26 (8): 661-677.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
49. 1. Larson, Eric C, and
    2. Richard S Krannich.

    2016. “A great idea, just not near me!” understanding public attitudes about renewable energy facilities. Society & Natural Resources 29 (12): 1436–1451.

    OpenUrl
50. Lazard. 2020. Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis. Retrieved from https://www.lazard.com/media/451419/lazards-levelized-cost-of-energy-version-140.pdf.
51. 1. Loomis, John B.

    2014. 2013 WAEA keynote address: Strategies for overcoming hypothetical bias in stated preference surveys. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics: 34–46.
52. 1. Louviere, Jordan J., and
    2. Robert J. Meyer.

    2017. Formal choice models of informal choices: What choice modeling research can (and can’t) learn from behavioral theory. Review of marketing research. Routledge: 3-32.
53. 1. Macawile, Janet, and
    2. Glenn Su.

    2009. Local government officials perceptions and attitudes towards solid waste management in Dasmarinas, Cavite, Philippines. Journal of Applied Sciences in Environmental Sanitation 4 (1): 63–69.

    OpenUrl
54. 1. Maddison, David,
    2. Reece Ogier, and
    3. Allan Beltrán.

    2023. The disamenity impact of solar farms: a hedonic analysis. Land Economics 99 (1): 1–16.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
55. 1. Maguire, Karen,
    2. Sophia J Tanner,
    3. Justin B Winikoff, and
    4. Ryan Williams.

    2024. Utility-scale solar and wind development in rural areas: Land cover change (2009–20). USDA Economic Research Report (330).
56. 1. Majumdar, Debaleena, and
    2. Martin J Pasqualetti.

    2019. Analysis of land availability for utilityscale power plants and assessment of solar photovoltaic development in the state of Arizona, USA. Renewable energy 134: 1213–1231.

    OpenUrl
57. 1. McCullagh, Peter.

    1980. Regression models for ordinal data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 42 (2): 109–127.

    OpenUrlWeb of Science
58. 1. McCulluough, Caleb.

    2023. Iowa Bill Would Limit Commercial Solar Panel Construction. Retrieved from https://www.thegazette.com/state-government/iowa-bill-would-limit-commercial-solar-panel-construction/.
59. 1. McFadden, Daniel.

    1972. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior.
60. 1. Mehedi, Tanveer Hassan,
    2. Eskinder Gemechu, and
    3. Amit Kumar.

    2022. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions and energy footprints of utility-scale solar energy systems. Applied Energy 314: 118918.

    OpenUrl
61. Midcontinent Independent System Operator. (2025, September). Generator Interconnection Queue. Retrieved from https://www.misoenergy.org/planning/resource-utilization/GI_Queue/.
62. 1. Mills, Sarah Banas,
    2. Douglas Bessette, and
    3. Hannah Smith.

    2019. Exploring landowners’ postconstruction changes in perceptions of wind energy in Michigan. Land Use Policy 82: 754–762.

    OpenUrl
63. 1. Mulvaney, Dustin.

    2017. Identifying the roots of green civil war over utility-scale solar energy projects on public lands across the American Southwest. Journal of Land Use Science 12 (6): 493–515.

    OpenUrl
64. 1. Musall, Fabian David, and
    2. Onno Kuik.

    2011. Local acceptance of renewable energy—a case study from southeast Germany. Energy policy 39 (6): 3252–3260.

    OpenUrl
65. 1. Nilson, Roberta S, and
    2. Richard C Stedman.

    2022. Are big and small solar separate things?: The importance of scale in public support for solar energy development in upstate New York. Energy Research & Social Science 86: 102449.

    OpenUrl
66. 1. Noll, Daniel,
    2. Colleen Dawes, and
    3. Varun Rai.

    2014. Solar community organizations and active peer effects in the adoption of residential PV. Energy Policy 67: 330–343.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
67. NREL. 2012. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from solar photovoltaics. Technical report, National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
68. 1. Nugent, Daniel, and
    2. Benjamin K Sovacool.

    2014. Assessing the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions from solar PV and wind energy: A critical meta-survey. Energy Policy 65: 229–244.

    OpenUrl
69. 1. Nylund-Gibson, Karen, and
    2. Andrew Young Choi.

    2018. Ten frequently asked questions about latent class analysis. Translational Issues in Psychological Science 4 (4): 440.

    OpenUrl
70. 1. Olsen, Søren Bøye,
    2. Thomas Hedemark Lundhede,
    3. Jette Bredahl Jacobsen, and
    4. Bo Jellesmark Thorsen.

    2011. Tough and easy choices: Testing the influence of utility difference on stated certainty-in-choice in choice experiments. Environmental and Resource Economics 49: 491–510.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
71. 1. Palm, Alvar, and
    2. Björn Lantz.

    2020. Information dissemination and residential solar PV adoption rates: The effect of an information campaign in Sweden. Energy Policy 142: 111540.

    OpenUrl
72. 1. Pascaris, Alexis S,
    2. Chelsea Schelly,
    3. Mark Rouleau, and
    4. Joshua M Pearce.

    2022. Do agrivoltaics improve public support for solar? A survey on perceptions, preferences, and priorities. Green Technology, Resilience, and Sustainability 2 (1): 8.

    OpenUrl
73. 1. Phaneuf, Daniel J.

    2013. Heterogeneity in environmental demand. Annual Review of Resource Economics 5 (1): 227–244.

    OpenUrl
74. 1. Rai, Varun, and
    2. Benjamin Sigrin.

    2013. Diffusion of environmentally-friendly energy technologies: buy versus lease differences in residential PV markets. Environmental Research Letters 8 (1): 014022.

    OpenUrl
75. Rocky Mountain Institute. (2021, January 26). Renewables offer rural America the economic development opportunity of a generation. Retrieved from https://rmi.org/renewables-offer-rural-america-the-economic-development-opportunity-of-a-generation/.
76. 1. Roddis, Philippa,
    2. Katy Roelich,
    3. Katherine Tran,
    4. Stephen Carver,
    5. Martin Dallimer, and
    6. Guy Ziv.

    2020. What shapes community acceptance of large-scale solar farms? A case study of the UK’s first ‘nationally significant’ solar farm. Solar Energy 209: 235–244.

    OpenUrl
77. 1. Roddis, Philippa,
    2. Stephen Carver,
    3. Martin Dallimer,
    4. Paul Norman, and
    5. Guy Ziv.

    2018. The role of community acceptance in planning outcomes for onshore wind and solar farms: An energy justice analysis. Applied Energy 226: 353–364.

    OpenUrl
78. 1. Rogers, Jennifer C,
    2. Eunice A Simmons,
    3. Ian Convery, and
    4. Andrew Weatherall.

    2008. Public perceptions of opportunities for community-based renewable energy projects. Energy policy 36 (11): 4217–4226.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
79. Reuters. (2024, September 17). U.S. solar jobs rise 6% in 2023, study says. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/us-solar-jobs-rise-6-2023-study-says-2024-09-17/.
80. 1. Sandorf, Erlend Dancke.

    2019. Did you miss something? inattentive respondents in discrete choice experiments. Environmental and Resource Economics 73 (4): 1197–1235.

    OpenUrl
81. 1. Schelly, Chelsea,
    2. Don Lee,
    3. Elise Matz, and
    4. Joshua M Pearce.

    2021. Applying a relationally and socially embedded decision framework to solar photovoltaic adoption: A conceptual exploration. Sustainability 13 (2): 711.

    OpenUrl
82. 1. Serenari, Christopher,
    2. M Nils Peterson,
    3. Christopher E Moorman,
    4. Frederick Cubbage, and
    5. Suzanne Jervis.

    2015. Application of choice experiments to determine stakeholder preferences for woody biomass harvesting guidelines. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 34 (4): 343–357.

    OpenUrl
83. 1. Sias, Richard,
    2. Laura T Starks, and
    3. Harry J Turtle.

    2023. The negativity bias and perceived return distributions: Evidence from a pandemic. Journal of Financial Economics 147 (3): 627–657.

    OpenUrl
84. 1. Sinha, Pratik,
    2. Carolyn S Calfee, and
    3. Kevin L Delucchi.

    2021. Practitioner’s guide to latent class analysis: methodological considerations and common pitfalls. Critical care medicine 49 (1): e63–e79.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
85. 1. Steinmann, Zoran JN,
    2. Mara Hauck,
    3. Ramkumar Karuppiah,
    4. Ian J Laurenzi, and
    5. Mark AJ Huijbregts.

    2014. A methodology for separating uncertainty and variability in the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of coal-fueled power generation in the USA. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 19: 1146–1155.

    OpenUrl
86. 1. Suh, Jangwon, and
    2. Jeffrey RS Brownson.

    2016. Solar farm suitability using geographic information system fuzzy sets and analytic hierarchy processes: Case study of Ulleung Island, Korea. Energies 9 (8): 648.

    OpenUrl
87. 1. Train, Kenneth E.

    2009. Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press.
88. 1. Trainor, Anne M,
    2. Robert I McDonald, and
    3. Joseph Fargione.

    2016. Energy sprawl is the largest driver of land use change in United States. PloS one 11 (9): e0162269.

    OpenUrlPubMed
89. 1. Uggeldahl, Kennet,
    2. Catrine Jacobsen,
    3. Thomas Hedemark Lundhede, and
    4. Søren Bøye Olsen.

    2016. Choice certainty in discrete choice experiments: Will eye tracking provide useful measures?. Journal of Choice Modelling, 20, 35-48.

    OpenUrl
90. US Energy Information Administration. 2022. 2022 Average Monthly Bill- Residential. Retrieved from https://dee.nebraska.gov/sites/default/files/energy/145_Residential.pdf.
91. US Energy Information Administration. 2022. Preliminary monthly electric generator inventory. Inventory of Operating Generators as of July.
92. US Energy Information Administration. 2023. Form EIA-923 detailed data with previous form data (EIA-906/920).
93. US Energy Information Administration. 2024. Preliminary monthly electric generator inventory. Inventory of Operating Generators as of December.
94. 1. Veldwijk, Jorien,
    2. Mattijs S Lambooij,
    3. Esther W de Bekker-Grob,
    4. Henriette A Smit, and
    5. G Ardine de Wit.

    2014. The effect of including an opt-out option in discrete choice experiments. PloS one 9 (11): e111805.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
95. 1. Vossler, Christian A,
    2. Maurice Doyon, and
    3. Daniel Rondeau.

    2012. Truth in consequentiality: theory and field evidence on discrete choice experiments. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 4 (4): 145–171.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
96. 1. Vossler, Christian A, and
    2. Mary F Evans.

    2009. Bridging the gap between the field and the lab: Environmental goods, policy maker input, and consequentiality. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 58 (3): 338–345.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
97. 1. Vossler, Christian A., and
    2. Sharon B. Watson.

    2013. Understanding the consequences of consequentiality: Testing the validity of stated preferences in the field. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 86: 137-147.

    OpenUrl
98. 1. Vrieze, Scott I.

    2012. Model selection and psychological theory: a discussion of the differences between the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and the Bayesian information criterion (BIC). Psychological Methods 17, no. 2: 228.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
99. 1. Williams, Richard.

    2006. Generalized ordered logit/partial proportional odds models for ordinal dependent variables. The Stata Journal 6 (1): 58–82.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
100. 1. Woli, Krishna P,
     2. C Lee Burras,
     3. Lori J Abendroth, and
     4. Roger W Elmore.

     2014. Optimizing corn seeding rates using a field’s corn suitability rating. Agronomy Journal 106 (4): 1523–1532.

     OpenUrl
101. 1. Wolske, Kimberly S,
     2. Paul C Stern, and
     3. Thomas Dietz.

     2017. Explaining interest in adopting residential solar photovoltaic systems in the United States: Toward an integration of behavioral theories. Energy Research & Social Science 25: 134–151.

     OpenUrl
102. 1. Wolske, Kimberly S,
     2. Annika Todd,
     3. Michael Rossol,
     4. James McCall, and
     5. Benjamin Sigrin.

     2018. Accelerating demand for residential solar photovoltaics: Can simple framing strategies increase consumer interest? Global Environmental Change 53: 68–77.

     OpenUrl
103. 1. Zhang, Wendong.

     2022. 2022 Iowa State University Land Value Survey: Overview. Retrieved from https://farmland.card.iastate.edu/files/inline-files/2022-ISU-Land-Value-Survey-Overview.pdf.