IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i19p10889-d647264.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Benefits of Eco-Agriculture: The Cases of Farms along Taiwan’s East Coast in Yilan and Hualien

Author

Listed:
  • Kai-Lih Chen

    (Department of Applied Economics and Management, College of Humanities and Management, National I-Lan University, I-Lan 260, Taiwan)

  • Wei-Hsin Kong

    (Department of Applied Economics and Management, College of Humanities and Management, National I-Lan University, I-Lan 260, Taiwan)

  • Chi-Cheng Chen

    (Hualien District Agricultural Research and Extension Station, Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan, Hualien 973, Taiwan)

  • Je-Liang Liou

    (The Center for Green Economy, Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research, Taipei 106, Taiwan)

Abstract

The ecological agriculture (hereinafter referred to as eco-agriculture) concept has grown rapidly in Taiwan in recent years. More and more successful eco-agriculture projects have thus sprouted up in Taiwan, and so a quantitative evaluation model of such projects becomes critically important for improving public understanding of eco-agriculture and for providing a basis for policy analysis. This research thus proposes a quantitative evaluation model for eco-agriculture and analyzes the empirical data collected. We take four farms that practice eco-agriculture in eastern Taiwan for the estimation of direct benefits by surveying farmers about their revenues and costs of crop yields. To evaluate indirect benefits, we employ the Contingent Value Method (CVM) to investigate the willingness-to-pay (WTP) of users and non-users to support eco-agriculture. Results from the direct benefit estimation indicate that eco-agriculture adoption is unlikely to improve the local livelihoods of farming communities. In terms of indirect benefit estimation, eco-agriculture is beneficial to society, but based on our analysis of the direct benefits, these indirect benefits fail to be transformed into profits, showing that eco-agriculture exhibits positive externalities. This constitutes unavoidable challenges for eco-agriculture to be sustainable if these positive externalities cannot be internalized.

Suggested Citation

  • Kai-Lih Chen & Wei-Hsin Kong & Chi-Cheng Chen & Je-Liang Liou, 2021. "Evaluating Benefits of Eco-Agriculture: The Cases of Farms along Taiwan’s East Coast in Yilan and Hualien," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-23, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:19:p:10889-:d:647264
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/19/10889/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/19/10889/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 1988. "A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 355-379, September.
    2. Hirotsugu Uchida & Cathy A. Roheim & Hiroki Wakamatsu & Christopher M. Anderson, 2014. "Do Japanese consumers care about sustainable fisheries? Evidence from an auction of ecolabelled seafood," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 58(2), pages 263-280, April.
    3. Pascale Bazoche & Pierre Combris & Eric Giraud-Héraud & Alexandra Seabra Pinto & Frank Bunte & Efthimia Tsakiridou, 2014. "Willingness to pay for pesticide reduction in the EU: nothing but organic?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 41(1), pages 87-109, February.
    4. Todd M. Schmit & Bradley J. Rickard & John Taber, 2013. "Consumer Valuation of Environmentally Friendly Production Practices in Wines, considering Asymmetric Information and Sensory Effects," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(2), pages 483-504, June.
    5. Michael Hanemann & John Loomis & Barbara Kanninen, 1991. "Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1255-1263.
    6. Rasul, Golam & Thapa, Gopal B., 2004. "Sustainability of ecological and conventional agricultural systems in Bangladesh: an assessment based on environmental, economic and social perspectives," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 327-351, March.
    7. Guzhen Zhou & Wuyang Hu & Wenchao Huang, 2016. "Are Consumers Willing to Pay More for Sustainable Products? A Study of Eco-Labeled Tuna Steak," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-18, May.
    8. Uematsu, Hiroki & Mishra, Ashok K., 2012. "Organic farmers or conventional farmers: Where's the money?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 55-62.
    9. Cameron, Trudy Ann & James, Michelle D, 1987. "Efficient Estimation Methods for "Closed-ended' Contingent Valuation Surveys," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(2), pages 269-276, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Beata Fornal-Pieniak & Agnieszka Mandziuk & Dagmara Stangierska & Stanisław Parzych & Pedro Miguel Ramos Arsénio, 2023. "Preferences of Young Adult Visitors to Manor Parks in South Poland: A Study on Ecosystem Services and Scenic Quality," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-12, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lucio CECCHINI & Biancamaria TORQUATI & Massimo CHIORRI, 2018. "Sustainable agri-food products: A review of consumer preference studies through experimental economics," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 64(12), pages 554-565.
    2. P. Calia & E. Strazzera, 1998. "Bias and efficiency of single vs. double bound models for contingent valuation studies: a Monte Carlo Analysis," Working Paper CRENoS 199801, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    3. Carmelo Javier León, 1995. "El método dicotómico de valoración contingente: una aplicación a los espacios naturales en Gran Canaria," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 19(1), pages 83-106, January.
    4. Deborah Bentivoglio & Adele Finco & Giorgia Bucci & Giacomo Staffolani, 2020. "Is There a Promising Market for the A2 Milk? Analysis of Italian Consumer Preferences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Gebreegziabher, Z. & Mekonnen, A. & Beyene, A.D. & Hagos, F., 2018. "Valuation of access to irrigation water in rural Ethiopia: application of choice experiment and contingent valuation methods," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Raineau, Yann & Giraud-Héraud, Éric & Lecocq, Sébastien & Pérès, Stéphanie & Pons, Alexandre & Tempère, Sophie, 2023. "When health-related claims impact environmental demand: Results of experimental auctions with Bordeaux wine consumers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    7. Ludwig, Jens & Cook, Philip J, 2001. "The Benefits of Reducing Gun Violence: Evidence from Contingent-Valuation Survey Data," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 207-226, May.
    8. Sukharomana, Renu & Supalla, Raymond J., 1998. "Effect Of Risk Perception On Willingness To Pay For Improved Water Quality," 1998 Annual meeting, August 2-5, Salt Lake City, UT 20869, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    9. Ngouhouo Poufoun, Jonas & Abildtrup, Jens & Sonwa, Dénis Jean & Delacote, Philippe, 2016. "The value of endangered forest elephants to local communities in a transboundary conservation landscape," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 70-86.
    10. Corsi, Alessandro & Frontuto, Vito & Novelli, Silvia, 2022. "Relational goods and direct purchase from farmers: estimating the value of the relationship between consumers and producers," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 25(2), March.
    11. Cameron Trudy Ann & Quiggin John, 1994. "Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data from a Dichotomous Choice with Follow-Up Questionnaire," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 218-234, November.
    12. Tsigkou, Stavroula & Klonaris, Stathis, 2020. "Eliciting Farmers' Willingness to Pay for Innovative Fertilizer Against Soil Salinity: Comparison of Two Methods in a Field Survey," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 9, December.
    13. Scarpa, Riccardo & Chilton, Susan M. & Hutchinson, W. George & Buongiorno, Joseph, 2000. "Valuing the recreational benefits from the creation of nature reserves in Irish forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-250, May.
    14. Huh, Sung-Yoon & Lee, Jongsu & Shin, Jungwoo, 2015. "The economic value of South Korea׳s renewable energy policies (RPS, RFS, and RHO): A contingent valuation study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 64-72.
    15. Hanemann, W. Michael & Kanninen, Barbara, 1996. "The Statistical Analysis Of Discrete-Response Cv Data," CUDARE Working Papers 25022, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    16. Seo-Hyeon Min & Seul-Ye Lim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2017. "Consumers’ Willingness to Pay a Premium for Eco-Labeled LED TVs in Korea: A Contingent Valuation Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-12, May.
    17. Tsui, Hsiao-Chien, 2012. "Advertising, quality, and willingness-to-pay: Experimental examination of signaling theory," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1193-1203.
    18. Wan-Jiun Chen & Jihn-Fa Jan & Chih-Hsin Chung & Shyue-Cherng Liaw, 2022. "Resident Willingness to Pay for Ecosystem Services in Hillside Forests," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-17, May.
    19. Seul-Ye Lim & Se-Jun Jin & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2017. "The Economic Benefits of the Dokdo Seals Restoration Project in Korea: A Contingent Valuation Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-15, June.
    20. Talwar, Shagorika, 1995. "An evaluation of statistical efficiency and bias trade-off involved with the use of follow-up questioning in the contingent valuation of environmental amenities," ISU General Staff Papers 1995010108000018160, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:19:p:10889-:d:647264. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.