IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae08/44320.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Green payment programs, asymmetric information and the role of fixed costs

Author

Listed:
  • Arguedas, C.
  • Meijerink, Gerdien W.
  • van Soest, Daan P.

Abstract

Many conservation programs offer financial compensation to farmers in exchange for socially desired services, such as soil conservation or biodiversity protection. Realization of the conservation objective at minimum cost requires payments to just cover the extra costs incurred by each individual (type of) farmer. In the presence of information asymmetries regarding costs, incentive-compatible contracts can be designed to mitigate excess compensation, but these typically only provide partial improvement because of several distortions. We argue that these distortions are inevitable only if all conservation costs are variable in nature. If there are fixed costs too, we find that the least-cost solution can be incentive compatible. We identify the exact conditions under which these maximum savings can be obtained and conclude that, given the relevance of fixed costs in conservation services provision, incentive—compatible contracts deserve a second look.

Suggested Citation

  • Arguedas, C. & Meijerink, Gerdien W. & van Soest, Daan P., 2008. "Green payment programs, asymmetric information and the role of fixed costs," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44320, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae08:44320
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.44320
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/44320/files/469.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.44320?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew Moxey & Ben White & Adam Ozanne, 1999. "Efficient Contract Design for Agri‐Environment Policy," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 187-202, May.
    2. Tun Lin & Timo Goeschl, 2004. "Biodiversity Conservation on Private Lands: Information Problems and Regulatory Choices," Working Papers 2004.55, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    3. Luca Di Corato, 2006. "Mechanism Design for Biodiversity Conservation in Developing Countries," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0034, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    4. Ferraro, Paul J., 2008. "Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 810-821, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Carmen Arguedas & Daan Soest, 2011. "Optimal Conservation Programs, Asymmetric Information and the Role of Fixed Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(2), pages 305-323, October.
    2. Schilizzi, Steven & Breustedt, Gunnar & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2011. "Does tendering conservation contracts with performance payments generate additional benefits?," Working Papers 100883, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    3. Latacz-Lohmann, U. & Schilizzi, S. & Breustedt, G., 2012. "Auctioning outcome-based conservation contracts," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 47, March.
    4. Salas, Paula Cordero & Roe, Brian E. & Sohngen, Brent, 2012. "Addressing Additionality in REDD Contracts when Formal Enforcement is Absent," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124505, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Peter Bardsley & Ingrid Burfurd, 2008. "Contract Design for Biodiversity Procurement," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1031, The University of Melbourne.
    6. Kuhfuss, Laure & Jacquet, Florence, 2012. "Le dispositif des MAEt pour l’enjeu eau : une fausse bonne idée ?," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 93(4).
    7. Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Schilizzi, Steven & Breustedt, Gunnar, 2011. "Auctioning Outcome-Based Conservation Contracts," 51st Annual Conference, Halle, Germany, September 28-30, 2011 114523, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    8. Cho, Wonjoo & Blandford, David, 2015. "Bilateral information asymmetry and irreversible practice adoption through agri-environmental policy: an application to peat land retirement in Norway," 89th Annual Conference, April 13-15, 2015, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 204212, Agricultural Economics Society.
    9. Saint-Cyr, Legrand D.F. & Védrine, Lionel & Legras, Sophie & Le Gallo, Julie & Bellassen, Valentin, 2023. "Drivers of PES effectiveness: Some evidence from a quantitative meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    10. Colman, David & Pascual, Unai & Hodge, Ian, 2010. "Evolution of Land Conservation Policy," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188082, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    11. Romstad, Eirik & Alfnes, Frode, 2011. "Bidding behavior in environmental contract auctions with incomplete monitoring," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115985, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Murphy, Geraldine & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & Murphy, Eithne, 2014. "Modelling the Participation Decision in Agri-Environmental Schemes," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183069, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Francisco Alpízar & Anna Nordén & Alexander Pfaff & Juan Robalino, 2017. "Unintended Effects of Targeting an Environmental Rebate," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(1), pages 181-202, May.
    14. Russell, Noel P. & Sauer, Johannes, 2012. "Beneficial selection and the efficient procurement of ecosystem services," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124894, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Ben White & Nick Hanley, 2014. "Should We Pay for Ecosystem Service Outputs, Actions or Both?," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2014-08, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    16. Russell, Noel P. & Sauer, Johannes, 2012. "Efficient Procurement of Ecosystem Services – Adverse versus Beneficial Selection," 86th Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2012, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 134988, Agricultural Economics Society.
    17. Ito, Junichi, 2022. "Program design and heterogeneous treatment effects of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    18. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    19. Signe Anthon & Serge Garcia & Anne Stenger, 2010. "Incentive Contracts for Natura 2000 Implementation in Forest Areas," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(3), pages 281-302, July.
    20. Jianxiong Zhang & Lin Feng & Wansheng Tang, 2014. "Optimal Contract Design of Supplier-Led Outsourcing Based on Pontryagin Maximum Principle," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 592-607, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:eaae08:44320. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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.