IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa03p56.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Land use and agriculture sustainability: does landscape matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Sylvie Ferrari

Abstract

In this paper, we focus on showing how landscape can play a role in the sustainability of agricultural activities and what conditions have to be required to consider landscape as a sustainable output in this way. Nowadays, agricultural policies in Europe attach a growing importance to the direct management by agricultural producers of the countryside. This actual trend emphasizes the role of non-commodity outputs in the production process, with respect to the multifunctional nature of agriculture. If the traditional function of the agricultural production process is to provide food, new functions of agriculture are taken into account and reveal the different attributes of land (use and non use values): agriculture may also produce rural amenities (hunting?), landscape, ecological services and habitat for wildlife, biodiversity. Here, a special emphasis is put on landscape. If several definitions exist (a non-market output, a public good, a positive externality of production, a joint production), all are concerned with the fact that landscape and other agricultural outputs are complements: they are often jointly produced. Our analysis is supported by the Georgescu-Roegen?s approach on funds and flows. Here, the dynamic property of landscape implies to consider it as a flow. An analytical representation of the agricultural production process lies upon two types of production factors: the funds -human labour, land and manufactured capital- and the flows -energy, natural resources, materials, pollution, waste and products (goods, landscape, amenities?)-. Funds and flows have the property to be complement in the process. In order to lay emphasis on the physical links between the agricultural production process and the natural environment, we follow a bioeconomic approach where the value of landscape can be appreciated through its physical foundations. According to the second law of thermodynamics, the sustainability of a production process depends upon the quality of all its flow components (inflows and outflows) during a period of time. Thus, the sustainability of any agricultural activity can be measured through the qualitative variation of the production process, i.e. through two major outflows: the waste production and the landscape production. On one hand, every time waste is produced, the irreversibility of the activity is growing and the style of farming is less sustainable (e.g. case of intensive farming). On the other hand, a growing production of landscape traduces an ability to reduce the irreversibility of the production process insofar as it is leading to more biodiversity. A relation between the level of sustainability of any agricultural production process and the landscape change in time may be established and may provide some useful guidelines for policy makers.

Suggested Citation

  • Sylvie Ferrari, 2003. "Land use and agriculture sustainability: does landscape matter?," ERSA conference papers ersa03p56, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa03p56
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa03/cdrom/papers/56.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan Randall, 2002. "Valuing the outputs of multifunctional agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 29(3), pages 289-307, July.
    2. England, Richard W., 2000. "Natural capital and the theory of economic growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 425-431, September.
    3. Kraev, Egor, 2002. "Stocks, flows and complementarity: formalizing a basic insight of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 277-286, December.
    4. Baumgartner, Stefan & Dyckhoff, Harald & Faber, Malte & Proops, John & Schiller, Johannes, 2001. "The concept of joint production and ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 365-372, March.
    5. Daniel W. Bromley, 2000. "Can Agriculture Become an Environmental Asset?," World Economics, World Economics, 1 Ivory Square, Plantation Wharf, London, United Kingdom, SW11 3UE, vol. 1(3), pages 127-139, July.
    6. Kaberger, Tomas & Mansson, Bengt, 2001. "Entropy and economic processes -- physics perspectives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 165-179, January.
    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. Rodrigues, João & Domingos, Tiago & Conceição, Pedro & Belbute, José, 2005. "Constraints on dematerialisation and allocation of natural capital along a sustainable growth path," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 382-396, September.
    2. Roseta-Palma, Catarina & Ferreira-Lopes, Alexandra & Sequeira, Tiago Neves, 2010. "Externalities in an endogenous growth model with social and natural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 603-612, January.
    3. Comolli, Paul, 2006. "Sustainability and growth when manufactured capital and natural capital are not substitutable," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 157-167, November.
    4. Werner Hediger & Bernard Lehmann, 2007. "Multifunctional Agriculture and the Preservation of Environmental Benefits," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 143(IV), pages 449-470, December.
    5. Catarina Roseta-Palma & Alexandra Ferreira-Lopes & Tiago Neves Sequeira, 2008. "Towards an Inclusive Model of Sustainable Growth," Working Papers Series 1 ercwp0408, ISCTE-IUL, Business Research Unit (BRU-IUL).
    6. Phillips, Paul S. & Barnes, Richard & Bates, Margaret P. & Coskeran, Thomas, 2006. "A critical appraisal of an UK county waste minimisation programme: The requirement for regional facilitated development of industrial symbiosis/ecology," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 242-264.
    7. Robbie Maris & Mark Holmes, 2023. "Economic Growth Theory and Natural Resource Constraints: A Stocktake and Critical Assessment," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 56(2), pages 255-268, June.
    8. Kallas, Z. & Gómez-Limón, J.A., 2007. "Valoración De La Multifuncionalidad Agraria: Una Aplicación A Través Del Método De Los Experimentos De Elección/Agricultural Multifunctionality Valuation: A Case Study Using The Choice Experiment," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 25, pages 107-144, Abril.
    9. Barbara Langlois & Vincent Martinet, 2023. "Defining cost-effective ways to improve ecosystem services provision in agroecosystems," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 123-165, June.
    10. Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2016. "Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric frameworkAuthor-Name: Dakpo, K. Hervé," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 347-359.
    11. Yoann Verger, 2015. "Sraffa and ecological economics: review of the literature," Working Papers hal-01182894, HAL.
    12. Werner Hediger, 2013. "From Multifunctionality and Sustainability of Agriculture to the Social Responsibility of the Agri-food System," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 6(1), pages 59-80.
    13. Funk, Matt, 2008. "On the Problem of Sustainable Economic Development: A Theoretical Solution to this Prisoner's Dilemma," MPRA Paper 19025, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 08 Jun 2008.
    14. Benjamin Leard, 2011. "Joan Martinez-Alier and Ingo Ropke (eds.): Recent developments in ecological economics (2 vols.)," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 161-178, July.
    15. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    16. Xiaoyan Yi & Qinqi Zou & Zewei Zhang & Sheng-Han-Erin Chang, 2023. "What Motivates Greenhouse Vegetable Farmers to Adapt Organic-Substitute-Chemical-Fertilizer (OSCF)? An Empirical Study from Shandong, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-14, January.
    17. Agnieszka Brelik, 2013. "Agro Tourism as Public Good in Rural Areas: A Case Study," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1), pages 67-74.
    18. Zein Kallas & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Manuel Arriaza, 2007. "Are citizens willing to pay for agricultural multifunctionality?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 36(3), pages 405-419, May.
    19. Chun-Chu Yeh & Cheng-Shen Lin & Chin-Huang Huang, 2018. "The Total Economic Value of Sport Tourism in Belt and Road Development—An Environmental Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    20. Sousa, Tania & Domingos, Tiago, 2006. "Is neoclassical microeconomics formally valid? An approach based on an analogy with equilibrium thermodynamics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 160-169, June.

    More about this item

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa03p56. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.