IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/joafsc/359395.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Smallholder Peri-Urban Organic Farming in Nepal: A Comparative Analysis of Farming Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Bhatta, Gopal Datt
  • Doppler, Werner

Abstract

Farming in the peri-urban areas of Nepal is increasingly characterized by monocropping and the imprudent use of agrochemicals. This intensification has raised questions about the sustainability of farming systems in the region. In this paper, we do a comparative assessment of these farming systems, focusing on organic production in the densely populated Kathmandu Valley. The relative inaccessibility of farming accessories and of modern farming technologies usually leads rural farmers to follow traditional farming methods, sometimes referred to as "default organic." In contrast, access to infrastructures opens avenues for further development of ecological farming in peri-urban areas. Gross margin analysis indicates that organic vegetable production is a lucrative endeavor in the area under study. Urbanites are willing to buy organic vegetables, but the higher price and lack of certification of organically produced vegetables are factors that should be taken into account by producers and organizations working in organic production. We suggest that nongovernmental bodies, along with government-run institutions, cooperatives, and community-based organizations, can play a facilitating role for a smallholder organic growers certification program. They should also support peri-urban farmers in their efforts to enhance the environment and agrobiodiversity.

Suggested Citation

  • Bhatta, Gopal Datt & Doppler, Werner, 2011. "Smallholder Peri-Urban Organic Farming in Nepal: A Comparative Analysis of Farming Systems," Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, Center for Transformative Action, Cornell University, vol. 1(3).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:joafsc:359395
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/359395/files/46.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schupp, Alvin R. & Gillespie, Jeffrey M., 2001. "Consumer Attitudes Toward Potential Country-Of-Origin Labeling Of Fresh Or Frozen Beef," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 32(3), pages 1-11, November.
    2. Boyd, James & Banzhaf, Spencer, 2007. "What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 616-626, August.
    3. Gopal Bhatta & Werner Doppler, 2010. "Farming Differentiation in the Rural-urban Interface of the Middle Mountains, Nepal: Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Modeling," Journal of Agricultural Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 2(4), pages 1-37, November.
    4. Midmore, D. J. & Jansen, H. G. P., 2003. "Supplying vegetables to Asian cities: is there a case for peri-urban production?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 13-27, February.
    5. Misra, Sukant K. & Huang, Chung L. & Ott, Stephen L., 1991. "Consumer Willingness To Pay For Pesticide-Free Fresh Produce," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 16(2), pages 1-10, December.
    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. Zhifeng Gao & Ted C. Schroeder, 2009. "Consumer responses to new food quality information: are some consumers more sensitive than others?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 339-346, May.
    2. Preusse, Verena & Wollni, Meike, 2021. "Adoption of sustainable agricultural practices in the context of urbanisation and environmental stress – Evidence from farmers in the rural-urban interface of Bangalore, India," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 312690, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    4. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    5. Drakou, E.G. & Crossman, N.D. & Willemen, L. & Burkhard, B. & Palomo, I. & Maes, J. & Peedell, S., 2015. "A visualization and data-sharing tool for ecosystem service maps: Lessons learnt, challenges and the way forward," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 134-140.
    6. Hooper, Tara & Cooper, Philip & Hunt, Alistair & Austen, Melanie, 2014. "A methodology for the assessment of local-scale changes in marine environmental benefits and its application," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 65-74.
    7. Qenani-Petrela, Eivis & Noel, Jay E. & Mastin, Thomas, 2007. "A Benefit Transfer Approach to the Estimation of Agro-Ecosystems Services Benefits: A Case Study of Kern County, California," Research Project Reports 121605, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Institute for the Study of Specialty Crops.
    8. Gerner, Nadine V. & Nafo, Issa & Winking, Caroline & Wencki, Kristina & Strehl, Clemens & Wortberg, Timo & Niemann, André & Anzaldua, Gerardo & Lago, Manuel & Birk, Sebastian, 2018. "Large-scale river restoration pays off: A case study of ecosystem service valuation for the Emscher restoration generation project," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 327-338.
    9. H. Spencer Banzhaf & James Boyd, 2012. "The Architecture and Measurement of an Ecosystem Services Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-32, March.
    10. Wang, Shifeng & Wang, Sicong & Smith, Pete, 2015. "Quantifying impacts of onshore wind farms on ecosystem services at local and global scales," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1424-1428.
    11. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    12. Owusu, Victor & Owusu, Michael Anifori, 2010. "Measuring Market Potential for Fresh Organic Fruit and Vegetable in Ghana," 2010 AAAE Third Conference/AEASA 48th Conference, September 19-23, 2010, Cape Town, South Africa 95955, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    13. repec:zib:zbseps:v:2:y:2022:2:1:p:44-52 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Diane P. Dupont, 2019. "Editorial: Special Issue in Honour of Dr. Steven Renzetti," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(02), pages 1-10, April.
    15. 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.
    16. Bo Yang & Ming-Han Li & Shujuan Li, 2013. "Design-with-Nature for Multifunctional Landscapes: Environmental Benefits and Social Barriers in Community Development," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-26, October.
    17. Pistorius, Till & Schaich, Harald & Winkel, Georg & Plieninger, Tobias & Bieling, Claudia & Konold, Werner & Volz, Karl-Reinhard, 2012. "Lessons for REDDplus: A comparative analysis of the German discourse on forest functions and the global ecosystem services debate," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 4-12.
    18. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    19. Batie, Sandra S. & Swinton, Scott M. & Schulz, Mary A., 1999. "Fqpa Implementation To Reduce Pesticide Residue Risks: Part I: Agricultural Producer Concerns," Staff Paper Series 11813, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    20. Aevermann Tim & Schmude Jürgen, 2015. "Quantification and monetary valuation of urban ecosystem services in Munich, Germany," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 59(3), pages 188-200, December.
    21. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:joafsc:359395. 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: .

    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.