IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae15/211736.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing Agricultural Land Use Change in the Midlands Region of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: Application of Mixed-Multinomial Logit

Author

Listed:
  • Hitayezu, Patrick
  • Wale, Edilegnaw
  • Ortmann, Gerald

Abstract

On-farm tree cultivation is considered an important strategy to mitigate detrimental environmental impacts of agricultural land-use change (ALUC). In South Africa, however, little is known about farm-level incentives and constraints that govern ALUC decisions among small-scale farmers. To address this knowledge gap, this study employs a mixed multinomial logit (MMNL) model by using a combination of revealed and stated preference data. After correcting for endogeneity, the estimated results show that decisions about ALUC are rationally derived and driven by clear but heterogeneous preferences and trade-offs between crop productivity, food security and labour saving. The results further show that the decision to plant sugarcane is constrained by landholding, whilst farmland afforestation is negatively influenced by household size. Decisions to convert land use are also driven by the behaviour of peer groups and agro-ecological conditions. Based on these findings, important policy implications for sustainable land use are outlined.

Suggested Citation

  • Hitayezu, Patrick & Wale, Edilegnaw & Ortmann, Gerald, 2015. "Assessing Agricultural Land Use Change in the Midlands Region of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: Application of Mixed-Multinomial Logit," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211736, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae15:211736
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.211736
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/211736/files/Hitayezu-Assessing%20Agricultural%20Land%20Use%20Change%20in%20the%20Midlands%20Region-728.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.211736?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. Jordan Louviere & Kenneth Train & Moshe Ben-Akiva & Chandra Bhat & David Brownstone & Trudy Cameron & Richard Carson & J. Deshazo & Denzil Fiebig & William Greene & David Hensher & Donald Waldman, 2005. "Recent Progress on Endogeneity in Choice Modeling," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 255-265, December.
    2. John C. Whitehead & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & George L. Van Houtven & Brett R. Gelso, 2008. "Combining Revealed And Stated Preference Data To Estimate The Nonmarket Value Of Ecological Services: An Assessment Of The State Of The Science," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 872-908, December.
    3. Swaibu Mbowa & Lieb Nieuwoudt, 1998. "Economies of size in sugar cane production in KwaZulu-Natal," Development Southern Africa, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 399-412.
    4. Cook, Douglas O. & Kieschnick, Robert & McCullough, B.D., 2008. "Regression analysis of proportions in finance with self selection," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 860-867, December.
    5. Andrew D. Foster & Mark R. Rosenzweig, 2010. "Microeconomics of Technology Adoption," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 395-424, September.
    6. Greiner, Romy, 2014. "Willingness of north Australian pastoralists and graziers to participate in contractual biodiversity conservation," 2014 Conference (58th), February 4-7, 2014, Port Macquarie, Australia 165839, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Just, Richard E & Zilberman, David, 1983. "Stochastic Structure, Farm Size and Technology Adoption in Developing Agriculture," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 307-328, July.
    8. Lynne, Gary D. & Franklin Casey, C. & Hodges, Alan & Rahmani, Mohammed, 1995. "Conservation technology adoption decisions and the theory of planned behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 581-598, December.
    9. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, 2002. "Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2427.
    10. Bhat, Chandra R. & Gossen, Rachel, 2004. "A mixed multinomial logit model analysis of weekend recreational episode type choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 767-787, November.
    11. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    12. Walker, Joan L. & Ehlers, Emily & Banerjee, Ipsita & Dugundji, Elenna R., 2011. "Correcting for endogeneity in behavioral choice models with social influence variables," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 362-374, May.
    13. Judith Streak & Derek Yu & Servaas Van der Berg, 2009. "Measuring Child Poverty in South Africa: Sensitivity to the Choice of Equivalence Scale and an Updated Profile," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 94(2), pages 183-201, November.
    14. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    15. Klemick, Heather, 2011. "Constraints or Cooperation? Determinants of Secondary Forest Cover Under Shifting Cultivation," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(3), pages 1-17, December.
    16. Arslan, Aslihan & McCarthy, Nancy & Lipper, Leslie & Asfaw, Solomon & Cattaneo, Andrea, 2013. "Adoption and Intensity of Adoption of Conservation Farming Practices in Zambia," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 147461, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    17. Brey, Raul & Riera, Pere & Mogas, Joan, 2007. "Estimation of forest values using choice modeling: An application to Spanish forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 305-312, December.
    18. Charles A. Zelek & Gerald E. Shively, 2003. "Measuring the Opportunity Cost of Carbon Sequestration in Tropical Agriculture," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(3), pages 342-354.
    19. Emi Uchida & Scott Rozelle & Jintao Xu, 2009. "Conservation Payments, Liquidity Constraints, and Off-Farm Labor: Impact of the Grain-for-Green Program on Rural Households in China," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 70-86.
    20. Schatzki, Todd, 2003. "Options, uncertainty and sunk costs:: an empirical analysis of land use change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 86-105, July.
    21. Alix-Garcia, Jennifer & Wolff, Hendrik, 2014. "Payment for Ecosystem Services from Forests," IZA Discussion Papers 8179, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    22. Lawrence W. Libby & Jeff S. Sharp, 2003. "Land-Use Compatibility, Change, and Policy at the Rural-Urban Fringe: Insights from Social Capital," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1194-1200.
    23. Jennifer Alix-Garcia & Hendrik Wolff, 2014. "Payment for Ecosystem Services from Forests," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 361-380, October.
    24. Robert Walker & Stephen Perz & Marcellus Caldas & Luiz Guilherme Teixeira Silva, 2002. "Land Use and Land Cover Change in Forest Frontiers: The Role of Household Life Cycles," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 25(2), pages 169-199, April.
    25. Greiner, Romy & Ballweg, Julie, 2013. "Estimating the supply of on-farm biodiversity conservation services by north Australian pastoralists: design of a choice experiment," 2013 Conference (57th), February 5-8, 2013, Sydney, Australia 152153, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    26. Jill Windle & John Rolfe, 2005. "Diversification choices in agriculture: a Choice Modelling case study of sugarcane growers," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(1), pages 63-74, March.
    27. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2005. "Diversification choices in agriculture: a Choice Modelling case study of sugarcane growers," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(1), pages 1-12.
    28. Kajisa, Kei & Payongayong, Ellen, 2013. "Extensification and Intensification Process of Rainfed Lowland Rice Farming in Mozambique," Working Papers 61, JICA Research Institute.
    29. Trudy Ann Cameron, 1992. "Combining Contingent Valuation and Travel Cost Data for the Valuation of Nonmarket Goods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 302-317.
    30. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    31. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May.
    32. Angelsen, Arild, 1999. "Agricultural expansion and deforestation: modelling the impact of population, market forces and property rights," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 185-218, February.
    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. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    2. Hoyos Ramos, David, 2010. "Using discrete choice experiments for environmental valuation," BILTOKI 1134-8984, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística).
    3. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2007. "Discrete choice survey experiments: A comparison using flexible methods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 122-139, January.
    5. Day, Brett & Bateman, Ian & Binner, Amy & Ferrini, Silvia & Fezzi, Carlo, 2019. "Structurally-consistent estimation of use and nonuse values for landscape-wide environmental change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    6. Rowan, Emma & Longo, Alberto, 2009. "Enriching Stakeholder participation through Environmental Valuation; Eliciting Preferences for a National Park Designation in Northern Ireland," 83rd Annual Conference, March 30 - April 1, 2009, Dublin, Ireland 51071, Agricultural Economics Society.
    7. 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.
    8. Abildtrup, Jens & Garcia, Serge & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Stenger, Anne, 2013. "Spatial preference heterogeneity in forest recreation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 67-77.
    9. Hocheol Jeon & Joseph A. Herriges, 2017. "Combining Revealed Preference Data with Stated Preference Data: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(4), pages 1053-1086, December.
    10. Keane, Michael P. & Wasi, Nada, 2016. "How to model consumer heterogeneity? Lessons from three case studies on SP and RP data," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 197-231.
    11. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    12. Helen Scarborough & Jeff Bennett, 2012. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and Distributional Preferences," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14376.
    13. Hoyos, David & Riera, Pere, 2013. "Convergent validity between revealed and stated recreation demand data: Some empirical evidence from the Basque Country, Spain," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 234-248.
    14. Robert A. Androkovich, 2015. "Recreational Visits to the Adam's River during the Annual Sockeye Run: A Travel Cost Analysis," Marine Resource Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(1), pages 35-49.
    15. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2006. "Discrete Choice Survey Experiments: A Comparison Using Flexible Models," RFF Working Paper Series dp-05-60, Resources for the Future.
    16. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    17. Phaneuf, Daniel J. & Smith, V. Kerry, 2006. "Recreation Demand Models," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 671-761, Elsevier.
    18. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M., 2017. "Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 8-28.
    19. Stefano Ceolotto & Eleanor Denny, 2021. "Putting a new 'spin' on energy labels: measuring the impact of reframing energy efficiency on tumble dryer choices in a multi-country experiment," Trinity Economics Papers tep1521, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Land Economics/Use;

    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:iaae15:211736. 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/iaaeeea.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.