IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/agecon/v57y2026i3ne70110.html

Efficiency of Spatial Subsidies Under Information Constraints: A Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Germán Sánchez‐Arce
  • Montserrat Viladrich‐Grau

Abstract

This study compares the efficiency of homogeneous versus spatially heterogeneous subsidies in developing agricultural plans compatible with bird sustainability. Using the plains of Lleida as a case study—where incentives for agricultural intensification threaten a bird community‐we employ a spatially explicit model that simulates crop yields linked to a habitat suitability index for each species. Within this framework, we model subsidies to evaluate their impact on biodiversity conservation, farmer acceptance, required budget, and agricultural economic profitability. We also address incomplete information by relaxing the assumption that the regulator knows real opportunity costs and instead estimate them via sampling methods. Results show that a conservation‐focused homogeneous subsidy is significantly less efficient than a heterogeneous one. Heterogeneous subsidies differentiate between farmers' agricultural potential, enabling conservation goals to be met with lower budgets. Moreover, a development‐oriented heterogeneous scheme—which maximizes total agricultural profits while ensuring bird sustainability—can be even more effective, reducing implementation costs and promoting agricultural economic growth. However, incomplete information leads to suboptimal decisions, lowering total profits and causing losses for misidentified farmers who may require additional compensation. While heterogeneous subsidies remain budget‐efficient under incomplete information, achieving full farmer participation requires higher payments. This reduces their efficiency advantage, but heterogeneous subsidies still represent the more efficient option.

Suggested Citation

  • Germán Sánchez‐Arce & Montserrat Viladrich‐Grau, 2026. "Efficiency of Spatial Subsidies Under Information Constraints: A Case Study," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 57(3), May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:agecon:v:57:y:2026:i:3:n:e70110
    DOI: 10.1111/agec.70110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.70110
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/agec.70110?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. Marcelo Torres & Richard E. Howitt, 2019. "Payment for Environmental Services: How Big Must Be the Check to Multiproduct Farmers?," Natural Resource Management and Policy, in: Siwa Msangi & Duncan MacEwan (ed.), Applied Methods for Agriculture and Natural Resource Management, chapter 0, pages 77-88, Springer.
    2. Wätzold, Frank & Drechsler, Martin, 2002. "Spatial differentiation of compensation payments for biodiversity enhancing land-use measures," UFZ Discussion Papers 3/2002, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    3. Ohl, Cornelia & Drechsler, Martin & Johst, Karin & Wätzold, Frank, 2006. "Managing land use and land cover change in the biodiversity context with regard to efficiency, equality and ecological effectiveness," UFZ Discussion Papers 3/2006, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    4. Frank Wätzold & Martin Drechsler, 2005. "Spatially Uniform versus Spatially Heterogeneous Compensation Payments for Biodiversity-Enhancing Land-Use Measures," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 31(1), pages 73-93, May.
    5. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    6. Alper Demirdogen & Emine Olhan & Mehmet Hasdemir, 2022. "Heterogeneous impact of agricultural support policies: evidence from Turkey," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(10), pages 12203-12225, October.
    7. Jussi Lankoski, 2016. "Alternative Payment Approaches for Biodiversity Conservation in Agriculture," OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 93, OECD Publishing.
    8. Catharina Druckenbrod & Volker Beckmann, 2018. "Production-Integrated Compensation in Environmental Offsets—A Review of a German Offset Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-22, November.
    9. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sven Wunder & Manuel Ruiz-Pérez & Rocio del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Schlüter, Maja & Baeza, Andres & Dressler, Gunnar & Frank, Karin & Groeneveld, Jürgen & Jager, Wander & Janssen, Marco A. & McAllister, Ryan R.J. & Müller, Birgit & Orach, Kirill & Schwarz, Nina & Wij, 2017. "A framework for mapping and comparing behavioural theories in models of social-ecological systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 21-35.
    11. Loft, Lasse & Le, Dung Ngoc & Pham, Thuy Thu & Yang, Anastasia Lucy & Tjajadi, Januarti Sinarra & Wong, Grace Yee, 2017. "Whose Equity Matters? National to Local Equity Perceptions in Vietnam's Payments for Forest Ecosystem Services Scheme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 164-175.
    12. Basharat A. Pitafi & James A. Roumasset, 2009. "Pareto-Improving Water Management over Space and Time: The Honolulu Case," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 138-153.
    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. Nyanghura, Qambemeda M. & Biber-Freudenberger, Lisa & Börner, Jan, 2024. "Incentives for biodiversity conservation under asymmetric land ownership," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    2. Clifton, Julian & Mánez, Kathleen Schwerdtner, 2025. "A framework based on payments for ecosystem services to support the delivery of high integrity carbon and biodiversity credits," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Corbera, Esteve & Lapeyre, Renaud, 2019. "Payments for Environmental Services and Motivation Crowding: Towards a Conceptual Framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 434-443.
    4. Ohl, C. & Drechsler, M. & Johst, K. & Wätzold, F., 2008. "Compensation payments for habitat heterogeneity: Existence, efficiency, and fairness considerations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 162-174, September.
    5. Duong, Ngoc T.B. & De Groot, Wouter T., 2020. "The impact of payment for forest environmental services (PFES) on community-level forest management in Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    6. Loft, Lasse & Gehrig, Stefan & Le, Dung Ngoc & Rommel, Jens, 2019. "Effectiveness and equity of Payments for Ecosystem Services: Real-effort experiments with Vietnamese land users," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 218-228.
    7. Drechsler, Martin & Wätzold, Frank & Grimm, Volker, 2022. "The hitchhiker's guide to generic ecological-economic modelling of land-use-based biodiversity conservation policies," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 465(C).
    8. De Petris, Caterina & Drechsler, Martin, 2023. "Harnessing social norms to gain cost-effectiveness in conservation schemes through dynamic scheme design: implications of bounded rationality and other-regarding preferences for Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES)," MPRA Paper 119534, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 03 Jan 2024.
    9. Ferré, Marie & Engel, Stefanie & Gsottbauer, Elisabeth, 2022. "Incentivizing coordination in the adoption of sustainable land use when costs are heterogeneous: An economic experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    10. Andersson, Krister P. & Smith, Steven M. & Alston, Lee J. & Duchelle, Amy E. & Mwangi, Esther & Larson, Anne M. & de Sassi, Claudio & Sills, Erin O. & Sunderlin, William D. & Wong, Grace Y., 2018. "Wealth and the distribution of benefits from tropical forests: Implications for REDD+," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 510-522.
    11. Ulfia A. Lenfers & Julius Weyl & Thomas Clemen, 2018. "Firewood Collection in South Africa: Adaptive Behavior in Social-Ecological Models," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-17, August.
    12. Letícia Marçal Russo & Gamze Dane & Marco Helbich & Arend Ligtenberg & Gabriele Filomena & Christian P Janssen & Mila Koeva & Pirouz Nourian & Agnès Patuano & Paulo Raposo & Kristina Thompson & Sen, 2026. "Do urban digital twins need agents?," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 53(4), pages 778-803, May.
    13. Locatelli, Bruno & Benra, Felipe & Geneletti, Davide & Loft, Lasse & Loos, Jacqueline & Schröter, Barbara & Winkler, Klara & Zoderer, Brenda Maria, 2025. "Framing the relationship between justice and ecosystem services: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    14. Sommerville, Matthew & Jones, Julia P.G. & Rahajaharison, Michael & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2010. "The role of fairness and benefit distribution in community-based Payment for Environmental Services interventions: A case study from Menabe, Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1262-1271, April.
    15. Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2010. "Performance payments: A new strategy to conserve large carnivores in the tropics?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 405-412, December.
    16. Markova-Nenova, Nonka & Engler, Jan O. & Cord, Anna F. & Wätzold, Frank, 2023. "A Cost Comparison Analysis of Bird-Monitoring Techniques for Result-Based Payments in Agriculture," MPRA Paper 116311, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    18. Roopam Shukla & Ankit Agarwal & Kamna Sachdeva & Juergen Kurths & P. K. Joshi, 2019. "Climate change perception: an analysis of climate change and risk perceptions among farmer types of Indian Western Himalayas," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(1), pages 103-119, January.
    19. Zhang, Qi & Bilsborrow, Richard E. & Song, Conghe & Tao, Shiqi & Huang, Qingfeng, 2019. "Rural household income distribution and inequality in China: Effects of payments for ecosystem services policies and other factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 114-127.
    20. Florian Kotthoff & Thomas Hamacher, 2022. "Calibrating Agent-Based Models of Innovation Diffusion with Gradients," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 25(3), pages 1-4.

    More about this item

    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:bla:agecon:v:57:y:2026:i:3:n:e70110. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (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.