<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><xml><records><record><source-app name="HighWire" version="7.x">Drupal-HighWire</source-app><ref-type name="Journal Article">17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">McCann, Laura M. J.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hafdahl, Adam R.</style></author></authors><secondary-authors></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Agency Perceptions of Alternative Salinity Policies: The Role of Fairness</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Land Economics</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2007</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2007-08-01 00:00:00</style></date></pub-dates></dates><pages><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">331-352</style></pages><doi><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10.3368/le.83.3.331</style></doi><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">83</style></volume><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3</style></issue><abstract><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This study examined the relationship between agency staff preferences for salinity policies and perceptions of farmer cost, farmer resistance, effectiveness in salinity reduction, fairness, and administrative costs. A mail survey was conducted in Western Australia and structural equation modeling was used to examine the relationships between perceived policy attributes. As expected, fairness had a direct and significant effect on policy preference and also affected administrative costs, which in turn had a direct effect on policy preference. In the final model there was no direct effect between farmer costs and policy preferences. (JEL Q58, Q52)</style></abstract></record></records></xml>