IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/gewipr/261100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Eine erweiterte Gesamtrechnung der multifunktionalen Schweizer Landwirtschaft

Author

Listed:
  • Schläpfer, F.
  • Mann, S.

Abstract

In diesem Beitrag wird nach Wegen gesucht, die nichtmarktlichen Leistungen der Schweizer Landwirtschaft gezielter als bislang in die Landwirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnung zu integrieren. Dabei werden drei Methoden geprüft: Die Erfassung der leistungsbezogenen Direktzahlungen, die Ermittlung der zusätzlichen Kosten und Zahlungsbereitschaftsanalysen. Während gegen die Verwendung von Zahlungsbereitschaftsanalysen insbesondere unter Berücksichtigung der Datenlage in der Schweiz grundsätzliche Bedenken geäussert werden, gelangt die Arbeit zum Ergebnis, dass die Nicht-Markt-Leistungen einen Wert in der Grössenordnung von 0,8 bis 1,3 Milliarden Franken haben. Damit gibt es einen positiven, aber moderaten Beitrag der Landwirtschaft zur volkswirtschaftlichen Wertschöpfung. Klar formulierte und demokratisch legitimierte Ziel-Mittel-Kataloge bei der Bereitstellung nichtmarktlicher Leistungen würden den Bewertungsprozess methodisch erleichtern.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Schläpfer, F. & Mann, S., 2013. "Eine erweiterte Gesamtrechnung der multifunktionalen Schweizer Landwirtschaft," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 48, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:gewipr:261100
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.261100
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/261100/files/Bd48Nr28.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/261100/files/Bd48Nr28.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Aronsson & Per-Olav Johansson, 1997. "Welfare Measurement, Sustainability and Green National Accounting," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1240.
    2. Mann, Stefan & Wustemann, Henry, 2008. "Multifunctionality and a new focus on externalities," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 293-307, February.
    3. Mann, Stefan, 2003. "Die Kosten der Okomassnahmen in der Schweizer Landwirtschaft," Agrarwirtschaft und Agrarsoziologie\ Economie et Sociologie Rurales, Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 2003(1), pages 1-28.
    4. Robert Deacon & Felix Schläpfer, 2010. "The Spatial Range of Public Goods Revealed Through Referendum Voting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 305-328, November.
    5. Borcherding, Thomas E & Deacon, Robert T, 1972. "The Demand for the Services of Non-Federal Governments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(5), pages 891-901, December.
    6. R. M. Solow, 1974. "Intergenerational Equity and Exhaustible Resources," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(5), pages 29-45.
    7. Felix Schläpfer & Nick Hanley, 2006. "Contingent Valuation and Collective Choice," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 115-135, February.
    8. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
    9. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    10. John Hartwick, 1977. "Intergenerational Equity and the Investment of Rents from Exhaustible Resources in a Two Sector Model," Working Paper 281, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    11. Robert Huber & Marcel Hunziker & Bernard Lehmann, 2011. "Valuation of agricultural land-use scenarios with choice experiments: a political market share approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(1), pages 93-113.
    12. Partha Dasgupta & Geoffrey Heal, 1974. "The Optimal Depletion of Exhaustible Resources," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(5), pages 3-28.
    13. Hartwick, John M, 1977. "Intergenerational Equity and the Investing of Rents from Exhaustible Resources," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(5), pages 972-974, December.
    14. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65, pages 135-135.
    15. Adger, W Neil & Whitby, Martin C, 1993. "Natural-Resource Accounting in the Land-Use Sector: Theory and Practice," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 20(1), pages 77-97.
    16. Druckman, James N, 2001. "Using Credible Advice to Overcome Framing Effects," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 62-82, April.
    17. Howard R. Bowen, 1943. "The Interpretation of Voting in the Allocation of Economic Resources," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(1), pages 27-48.
    18. Hellerstein, Daniel & Nickerson, Cynthia J. & Cooper, Joseph C. & Feather, Peter & Gadsby, Dwight M. & Mullarkey, Daniel J. & Tegene, Abebayehu & Barnard, Charles H., 2002. "Farmland Protection: The Role Of Public Preferences For Rural Amenities," Agricultural Economics Reports 33963, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    19. Robert Inman, 1978. "Testing political economy’s ‘as if’ proposition: is the median income voter really decisive?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 45-65, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:gewipr:261100. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/gewisea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.