IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v160y2019icp62-75.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the effectiveness of Japan's community-based direct payment scheme for hilly and mountainous areas

Author

Listed:
  • Ito, Junichi
  • Feuer, Hart N.
  • Kitano, Shinichi
  • Asahi, Haruka

Abstract

The Japanese government introduced a direct payment scheme (DPS) for hilly and mountainous areas (HMAs) in 2000, with the aim of preventing further farmland abandonment in HMAs and compensating the farmers working in such disadvantaged regions for their costly production. Rural community members decide whether to participate in the DPS after taking account of its economic consequences. Using counterfactual-based empirical evaluation methods, we measure the extent to which a rural policy goal in Japan, namely the prevention of farmland abandonment, is achieved at the community level under the DPS framework. The pre-matching differences in the ratios of farmland abandonment, based on cross-sectional and longitudinal data, do not initially provide evidence to support the DPS's effectiveness or “additionality”. However, when confounding factors are considered, our estimation results lend strong support to the view that the DPS deters farmland abandonment. The most important driver of additionality is that the DPS targets communities with higher threat of farmland abandonment, which helps to prevent adverse participant selection from occurring. This can be supported by a rational inference that the DPS effectiveness would have been modest if farmlands on flat slopes were eligible for subsidization.

Suggested Citation

  • Ito, Junichi & Feuer, Hart N. & Kitano, Shinichi & Asahi, Haruka, 2019. "Assessing the effectiveness of Japan's community-based direct payment scheme for hilly and mountainous areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 62-75.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:160:y:2019:i:c:p:62-75
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.01.036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800918310139
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.01.036?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
    ---><---

    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. Chervier, Colas & Costedoat, Sébastien, 2017. "Heterogeneous Impact of a Collective Payment for Environmental Services Scheme on Reducing Deforestation in Cambodia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 148-159.
    2. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    3. Baylis, Kathy & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon & Simon, Leo, 2008. "Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: A comparison," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 753-764, May.
    4. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    5. Andrea Pufahl & Christoph R. Weiss, 2009. "Evaluating the effects of farm programmes: results from propensity score matching," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 36(1), pages 79-101, March.
    6. Alberto Alesina & Eliana La Ferrara, 2000. "Participation in Heterogeneous Communities," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(3), pages 847-904.
    7. Weihua Cao & Anastasios A. Tsiatis & Marie Davidian, 2009. "Improving efficiency and robustness of the doubly robust estimator for a population mean with incomplete data," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 96(3), pages 723-734.
    8. Ian Hodge, 2007. "The Governance of Rural Land in a Liberalised World," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 409-432, September.
    9. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    10. Chabé-Ferret, Sylvain & Subervie, Julie, 2013. "How much green for the buck? Estimating additional and windfall effects of French agro-environmental schemes by DID-matching," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 12-27.
    11. Mohebalian, Phillip M. & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2018. "Design of tropical forest conservation contracts considering risk of deforestation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 451-462.
    12. Jennifer M. Alix-Garcia & Katharine R. E. Sims & Patricia Yañez-Pagans, 2015. "Only One Tree from Each Seed? Environmental Effectiveness and Poverty Alleviation in Mexico's Payments for Ecosystem Services Program," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 1-40, November.
    13. Lichtenberg, Erik, 2002. "Agriculture and the environment," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 23, pages 1249-1313, Elsevier.
    14. Juan Robalino & Alexander Pfaff, 2013. "Ecopayments and Deforestation in Costa Rica: A Nationwide Analysis of PSA’s Initial Years," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(3), pages 432-448.
    15. Jennifer M. Alix-Garcia & Elizabeth N. Shapiro & Katharine R. E. Sims, 2012. "Forest Conservation and Slippage: Evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 613-638.
    16. Hashiguchi, Takuya, 2014. "Current status of agriculture and rural areas in Japan and prospect of new policy framework: comparison of the direct payment system in Japan and Europe," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182913, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Heejung Bang & James M. Robins, 2005. "Doubly Robust Estimation in Missing Data and Causal Inference Models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 61(4), pages 962-973, December.
    18. Ferraro, Paul J., 2008. "Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 810-821, May.
    19. Sikor, Thomas & Müller, Daniel & Stahl, Johannes, 2009. "Land Fragmentation and Cropland Abandonment in Albania: Implications for the Roles of State and Community in Post-Socialist Land Consolidation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1411-1423, August.
    20. Mariano Mezzatesta & David A. Newburn & Richard T. Woodward, 2013. "Additionality and the Adoption of Farm Conservation Practices," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(4), pages 722-742.
    21. Linda Arata & Paolo Sckokai, 2016. "The Impact of Agri-environmental Schemes on Farm Performance in Five E.U. Member States: A DID-Matching Approach," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 92(1), pages 167-186.
    22. Ferraro, Paul J. & Miranda, Juan José, 2014. "The performance of non-experimental designs in the evaluation of environmental programs: A design-replication study using a large-scale randomized experiment as a benchmark," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 344-365.
    23. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    24. Martin Persson, U. & Alpízar, Francisco, 2013. "Conditional Cash Transfers and Payments for Environmental Services—A Conceptual Framework for Explaining and Judging Differences in Outcomes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 124-137.
    25. Cooke, Benjamin & Moon, Katie, 2015. "Aligning ‘public good’ environmental stewardship with the landscape-scale: Adapting MBIs for private land conservation policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 152-158.
    26. Rodrigo A. Arriagada, & Paul J. Ferraro & Erin O. Sills & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Silvia Cordero-Sancho, 2012. "Do Payments for Environmental Services Affect Forest Cover? A Farm-Level Evaluation from Costa Rica," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(2), pages 382-399.
    27. Kaczan, David & Pfaff, Alexander & Rodriguez, Luz & Shapiro-Garza, Elizabeth, 2017. "Increasing the impact of collective incentives in payments for ecosystem services," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 48-67.
    28. Lundberg, Liv & Persson, U. Martin & Alpizar, Francisco & Lindgren, Kristian, 2018. "Context Matters: Exploring the Cost-effectiveness of Fixed Payments and Procurement Auctions for PES," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 347-358.
    29. 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.
    30. Engel, Stefanie, 2016. "The Devil in the Detail: A Practical Guide on Designing Payments for Environmental Services," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 9(1-2), pages 131-177, July.
    31. Martin Petrick & Patrick Zier, 2011. "Regional employment impacts of Common Agricultural Policy measures in Eastern Germany: a difference‐in‐differences approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(2), pages 183-193, March.
    32. Ito, Junichi & Feuer, Hart N. & Kitano, Shinichi & Komiyama, Midori, 2018. "A Policy Evaluation of the Direct Payment Scheme for Collective Stewardship of Common Property Resources in Japan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 141-151.
    33. Chihiro Udagawa & Ian Hodge & Mark Reader, 2014. "Farm Level Costs of Agri-environment Measures: The Impact of Entry Level Stewardship on Cereal Farm Incomes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(1), pages 212-233, January.
    34. Hegde, Ravi & Bull, Gary Q., 2011. "Performance of an agro-forestry based Payments-for-Environmental-Services project in Mozambique: A household level analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 122-130.
    35. Uchida, Emi & Xu, Jintao & Xu, Zhigang & Rozelle, Scott, 2007. "Are the poor benefiting from China's land conservation program?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(4), pages 593-620, August.
    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. Paulina Permatasari & Assyifa Szami Ilman & Carol Ann Tilt & Dian Lestari & Saiful Islam & Rita Helbra Tenrini & Arif Budi Rahman & Agunan Paulus Samosir & Irwanda Wisnu Wardhana, 2021. "The Village Fund Program in Indonesia: Measuring the Effectiveness and Alignment to Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-30, November.
    2. Sarker, Ashutosh, 2020. "Economics of underproduction: A polycentric approach for a depopulated commons in Japan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    3. Bethwell Moyo & Khuliso Emmanuel Ravhuhali, 2022. "Abandoned Croplands: Drivers and Secondary Succession Trajectories under Livestock Grazing in Communal Areas of South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, May.
    4. Shinichi Kitano, 2021. "Estimation of Determinants of Farmland Abandonment and Its Data Problems," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Paweł Postek & Justyna Wójcik-Leń & Przemysław Leń & Żanna Stręk, 2022. "Identifying Villages for Land Consolidation: A New Agricultural Land Erosion Indicator," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-14, November.
    6. Shinichi Kitano, 2020. "Formation Factors and Effects on Common Property Resource Conservation of Community Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-19, June.
    7. Yoshitaka Miyake & Shota Kimoto & Yuta Uchiyama & Ryo Kohsaka, 2022. "Income Change and Inter-Farmer Relations through Conservation Agriculture in Ishikawa Prefecture, Japan: Empirical Analysis of Economic and Behavioral Factors," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, February.
    8. Thang Quyet Nguyen & Nguyen Tan Huynh & Wen-Kai K. Hsu, 2021. "Estimate the Impact of Payments for Environmental Services on Local Livelihoods and Environment: An Application of Propensity Scores," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, August.
    9. A. Ford Ramsey & Tadashi Sonoda & Minkyong Ko, 2023. "Intersectoral labor migration and agriculture in the United States and Japan," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 54(3), pages 364-381, May.
    10. Ramsey, A. Ford & Sonoda, Tadashi & Ko, Minkyong, 2021. "Aggregation and Threshold Models of Intersectoral Labor Migration: Evidence from the United States and Japan," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315110, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Nitta, Atomu & Yamamoto, Yasutaka & Kondo, Katsunobu & Sawauchi, Daisuke, 2020. "Direct payments to Japanese farmers: Do they reduce rice income inequality? Lessons for other Asian countries," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 968-981.
    12. Justyna Wójcik-Leń, 2022. "Identifying Villages for Land Consolidation: A New Agricultural Wasteland Concentration Indicator," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-21, December.
    13. Ito, Junichi, 2022. "Program design and heterogeneous treatment effects of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    14. Taisuke Takayama & Tomoaki Nakatani & Tetsuji Senda & Takeshi Fujie, 2021. "Less‐favoured‐area payments, farmland abandonment and farm size: evidence from hilly and mountainous areas in Japan," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(3), pages 658-678, July.
    15. Atomu Nitta & Yasutaka Yamamoto & Simone Severini & Katsunobu Kondo & Daisuke Sawauchi, 2022. "Effects of direct payments on rice income variability in Japan," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(1), pages 118-135, January.
    16. Mika Wakamatsu Shin & Brian H. S. Kim, 2019. "The Effect of Direct Payment on the Prevention of Farmland Abandonment: The Case of the Hokkaido Prefecture in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.

    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. Ito, Junichi, 2022. "Program design and heterogeneous treatment effects of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    2. Börner, Jan & Baylis, Kathy & Corbera, Esteve & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss & Honey-Rosés, Jordi & Persson, U. Martin & Wunder, Sven, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Payments for Environmental Services," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 359-374.
    3. Ito, Junichi & Feuer, Hart N. & Kitano, Shinichi & Komiyama, Midori, 2018. "A Policy Evaluation of the Direct Payment Scheme for Collective Stewardship of Common Property Resources in Japan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 141-151.
    4. Liu, Zhaoyang & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2018. "Meta-Analysis of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services Programmes in Developing Countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 48-61.
    5. Jones, Kelly W. & Muñoz Brenes, Carlos L. & Shinbrot, Xoco A. & López-Báez, Walter & Rivera-Castañeda, Andrómeda, 2018. "The influence of cash and technical assistance on household-level outcomes in payments for hydrological services programs in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 208-218.
    6. Oliveira Fiorini, Ana Carolina & Mullally, Conner & Swisher, Marilyn & Putz, Francis E., 2020. "Forest cover effects of payments for ecosystem services: Evidence from an impact evaluation in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    7. Philippe Delacote & Gwenolé Le Velly & Gabriela Simonet, 2018. "A tale of REDD+ projects. How do location and certification impact additionality?," Working Papers 1808, Chaire Economie du climat.
    8. Gwenolé Le Velly & Céline Dutilly, 2016. "Evaluating Payments for Environmental Services: Methodological Challenges," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, February.
    9. Philippe Delacote & Gwenolé Le Velly & Gabriela Simonet, 2020. "Distinguishing potential and effective additionality to revisit the location bias of REDD+ project," Working Papers hal-01954923, HAL.
    10. Blazy, J.-M. & Subervie, J. & Paul, J. & Causeret, F. & Guindé, L. & Moulla, S. & Thomas, A. & Sierra, J., 2021. "Ex-ante assessment of the cost-effectiveness of public policies to sequester carbon in soils," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    11. Lliso, Bosco & Pascual, Unai & Engel, Stefanie, 2021. "On the role of social equity in payments for ecosystem services in Latin America: A practitioner perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    12. Arriagada, Rodrigo & Villaseñor, Adrián & Rubiano, Eliana & Cotacachi, David & Morrison, Judith, 2018. "Analysing the impacts of PES programmes beyond economic rationale: Perceptions of ecosystem services provision associated to the Mexican case," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 116-127.
    13. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M., 2017. "Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 8-28.
    14. Gwenolé Le Velly & Alexandre Sauquet & Sergio Cortina-Villar, 2017. "PES Impact and Leakages over Several Cohorts: The Case of the PSA-H in Yucatan, Mexico," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 93(2), pages 230-257.
    15. Núñez-Regueiro, Mauricio M. & Hiller, Josh & Branch, Lyn C. & Núñez Godoy, Cristina & Siddiqui, Sharmin & Volante, José & Soto, José R., 2020. "Policy lessons from spatiotemporal enrollment patterns of payment for ecosystem service programs in Argentina," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    16. Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M. & Sims, Katharine R.E. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 2019. "Using referenda to improve targeting and decrease costs of conditional cash transfers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 179-194.
    17. Robalino, Juan & Pfaff, Alexander & Sandoval, Catalina & Sanchez-Azofeifa, G. Arturo, 2021. "Can we increase the impacts from payments for ecosystem services? Impact rose over time in Costa Rica, yet spatial variation indicates more potential," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    18. Izquierdo-Tort, Santiago & Ortiz-Rosas, Fiorella & Vázquez-Cisneros, Paola Angélica, 2019. "‘Partial’ participation in Payments for Environmental Services (PES): Land enrolment and forest loss in the Mexican Lacandona Rainforest," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    19. Michalek, Jerzy, 2022. "Environmental and farm impacts of the EU RDP agri-environmental measures: Evidence from Slovak regions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    20. Delacote, Philippe & Le Velly, Gwenolé & Simonet, Gabriela, 2022. "Revisiting the location bias and additionality of REDD+ projects: the role of project proponents status and certification," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Direct payment scheme; Farmland abandonment; Adverse selection; Treatment effect model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
    • D04 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Policy: Formulation; Implementation; Evaluation
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products

    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:eee:ecolec:v:160:y:2019:i:c:p:62-75. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.