IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v103y2010i8p521-534.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conserving natural resources in olive orchards on sloping land: Alternative goal programming approaches towards effective design of cross-compliance and agri-environmental measures

Author

Listed:
  • Fleskens, Luuk
  • Graaff, Jan de

Abstract

Olive farming on sloping land in southern Europe is facing multiple challenges and it is reasonable to believe that farmers will opt for the abandonment of some systems and intensification or change to organic production of other systems. The issues at stake surpass financial farm viability and two EU policy instruments - cross-compliance and agri-environmental measures (AEM) - are available to address environmental objectives. This paper explores how cross-compliance and AEM policy options may lead to shifts in olive production systems and their social and environmental effects in Trás-os-Montes, NE Portugal over 25 years under two sets of conditions of uncertainty: decision-making by land users and market scenarios. Uncertainty in decision-making is addressed by employing five alternative goal programming models. The models include Linear Programming (LP), Weighted Goal Programming (WGP) and MINMAX Goal Programming (MINMAX GP), the GP variants of which are moreover formulated from a societal (S) and farmer (F) perspective. Uncertainty in market prospects is addressed by projecting olive oil and labour prices and trends in farm subsidies, distinguishing four price combinations in market scenarios. The models were validated by their capability to reproduce the initial configuration of olive production systems. Six policy options are evaluated under the complete ranges of uncertainty factors in a total of 6 x 5 x 4 = 120 model runs. Results show overall large effects of farmer decision-making and market scenarios. The cross-compliance and AEM policy instruments have an unequivocal effect on environmental performance and help to maintain work in rural areas. However, farmer income levels are insensitive to the policies, all work is absorbed by family labour and important environmental issues linked to more intensive systems such as pollution are not addressed. In a case study with the WGP (F) model which best reproduced the initial configuration of production systems, cross-compliance was moreover found to burden farmers under adverse market conditions, while AEM contributed to farmer's objectives under favourable market conditions. A solution would be to focus cross-compliance regulations on intensive systems and offer appropriate AEM for traditional or abandoned orchards. Both policy instruments proved effective, but there is scope for removing substantial overlap between them.

Suggested Citation

  • Fleskens, Luuk & Graaff, Jan de, 2010. "Conserving natural resources in olive orchards on sloping land: Alternative goal programming approaches towards effective design of cross-compliance and agri-environmental measures," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(8), pages 521-534, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:103:y:2010:i:8:p:521-534
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308-521X(10)00073-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Happe, Kathrin & Balmann, Alfons & Kellermann, Konrad & Sahrbacher, Christoph, 2008. "Does structure matter? The impact of switching the agricultural policy regime on farm structures," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 431-444, August.
    2. Elnagheeb, Abdelmoneim H. & Florkowski, Wojciech J., 1993. "Modeling Perennial Crop Supply: An Illustration From The Pecan Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 25(01), July.
    3. Stoorvogel, J. J. & Antle, J. M., 2001. "Regional land use analysis: the development of operational tools," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 70(2-3), pages 623-640.
    4. Elnagheeb, Abdelmoneim H. & Florkowski, Wojciech J., 1993. "Modeling Perennial Crop Supply: An Illustration from the Pecan Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(01), pages 187-196, July.
    5. Barbier, B. & Bergeron, G., 1999. "Impact of policy interventions on land management in Honduras: results of a bioeconomic model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 1-16, May.
    6. Janssen, Sander & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2007. "Assessing farm innovations and responses to policies: A review of bio-economic farm models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 622-636, June.
    7. Akiyama, T. & Trivedi, P. K., 1987. "Vintage production approach to perennial crop supply : An application to tea in major producing countries," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-2), pages 133-161.
    8. Nhantumbo, I. & Dent, J. B. & Kowero, G., 2001. "Goal programming: Application in the management of the miombo woodland in Mozambique," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 310-322, January.
    9. van Ittersum, M. K. & Rabbinge, R. & van Latesteijn, H. C., 1998. "Exploratory land use studies and their role in strategic policy making," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 309-330, November.
    10. de Koning, G. H. J. & Verburg, P. H. & Veldkamp, A. & Fresco, L. O., 1999. "Multi-scale modelling of land use change dynamics in Ecuador," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 77-93, August.
    11. Romero, Carlos, 2001. "Extended lexicographic goal programming: a unifying approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 63-71, February.
    12. de Wit, C. T. & van Keulen, H. & Seligman, N. G. & Spharim, I., 1988. "Application of interactive multiple goal programming techniques for analysis and planning of regional agricultural development," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 211-230.
    13. Tamiz, Mehrdad & Jones, Dylan & Romero, Carlos, 1998. "Goal programming for decision making: An overview of the current state-of-the-art," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(3), pages 569-581, December.
    14. Sáenz-Segura, Fernando & D'Haese, Marijke & Schipper, Robert A., 2010. "A seasonal model of contracts between a monopsonistic processor and smallholder pepper producers in Costa Rica," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 10-20, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mewes, Melanie & Drechsler, Martin & Johst, Karin & Sturm, Astrid & Wätzold, Frank, 2015. "A systematic approach for assessing spatially and temporally differentiated opportunity costs of biodiversity conservation measures in grasslands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 76-88.
    2. Pérez-Fortes, Mar & Laínez-Aguirre, José Miguel & Arranz-Piera, Pol & Velo, Enrique & Puigjaner, Luis, 2012. "Design of regional and sustainable bio-based networks for electricity generation using a multi-objective MILP approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 79-95.
    3. Salmoral, Gloria & Garrido, Alberto, 2015. "The Common Agricultural Policy as a driver of water quality changes: the case of the Guadalquivir River Basin (southern Spain)," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), issue 2, August.
    4. repec:eee:agisys:v:159:y:2018:i:c:p:111-125 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. O. Tzoraki & D. Cooper & G. Dörflinger & P. Panagos, 2014. "A new MONERIS in-Stream Retention Module to Account Nutrient Budget of a Temporary River in Cyprus," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(10), pages 2917-2935, August.

    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:eee:agisys:v:103:y:2010:i:8:p:521-534. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    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.