Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: A comparison
Agri-environmental policies (AEPs) in the United States and the European Union are examples of payments for environmental services that pay farmers to reduce the negative externalities of agricultural production, while serving as a means to transfer public funds to farmers. We show that despite similar origins, AEPs in the two regions differ both in their specific objectives and in their implementation. For example, AEPs in most member states of the EU-15 have the additional objective of using agriculture as a driver for rural development. This objective is achieved by compensating farmers for the private delivery of positive public goods, such as attractive landscapes, produced by agriculture. The rationale is market failure, and there is empirical evidence that Europeans are willing to pay for such positive externalities. No comparable provision exists in U.S. policy. By contrast, U.S. AEPs focus almost entirely on reducing agriculture's negative externalities, such as soil erosion. Second, we find that U.S. programs are more targeted than their EU counterparts, and take opportunity cost into account. The EU programs, on the other hand, address a wider range of externalities, and are focused more on the paying for a particular farming process than reducing specific negative externalities. The EU takes a broader view of AEPs than does the United States, both in terms of type of activity that can be funded, and by using less targeting by land characteristics, and so the European program could be more easily used as a mechanism for transferring income to producers. Despite this, we find evidence that many of the amenities targeted by the programs are demanded by the population.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- JunJie Wu, 2000. "Slippage Effects of the Conservation Reserve Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 979-992.
- Jules Pretty & Craig Brett & David Gee & Rachel Hine & Chris Mason & James Morison & Matthew Rayment & Gert Van Der Bijl & Thomas Dobbs, 2001. "Policy Challenges and Priorities for Internalizing the Externalities of Modern Agriculture," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(2), pages 263-283.
- Babcock, Bruce A. & Lakshminarayan, P. G. & Wu, J. & Zilberman, David, 1997. "Targeting Tools for the Purchase of Environmental Amenities," Staff General Research Papers 5220, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Yrjola, Tapani & Kola, Jukka, 2004. "Consumer Preferences Regarding Multifunctional Agriculture," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA), vol. 7(02).
- Ian Hodge, 2000. "Agri-environmental Pelationships and the Choice of Policy Mechanism," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 257-273, 02.
- Markus F. Hofreither & Erwin Schmid & Franz Sinabell, 2004.
"Phasing out of Environmentally Harmful Subsidies: Consequences of the 2003 CAP Reform,"
WIFO Working Papers
- Schmid, Erwin & Sinabell, Franz & Hofreither, Markus F., 2007. "Phasing out of environmentally harmful subsidies: Consequences of the 2003 CAP reform," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 596-604, January.
- Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Carel Van der Hamsvoort, 1997. "Auctioning Conservation Contracts: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(2), pages 407-418.
- 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.
- Thomas L. Dobbs & Jules N. Pretty, 2004. "Agri-Environmental Stewardship Schemes and “Multifunctionality”," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 220-237.
- Baylis, Katherine R. & Casamatta, Georges & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon C. & Simon, Leo K., 2005.
"Causes of Multifunctionality: Externalities or Political Pressure?,"
2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI
19297, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- Baylis, Katherine R. & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon C. & Simon, Leo K., 2005. "Causes Of Multifunctionality: Externalities Or Political Pressure," Working Papers 15841, University of British Columbia, Food and Resource Economics.
- Patricia A. Duffy & C. Robert Taylor & Danny L. Cain & George J. Young, 1994. "The Economic Value of Farm Program Base," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(3), pages 318-329.
- Franz Hackl & Gerald Pruckner, 1997. "Towards More Efficient Compensation Programmes for Tourists' Benefits From Agriculture in Europe," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 189-205, September.
- Feather, Peter & Hellerstein, Daniel & Hansen, LeRoy T., 1999. "Economic Valuation of Environmental Benefits and the Targeting of Conservation Programs: The Case of the CRP," Agricultural Economics Reports 34027, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
- Hansen, LeRoy T. & Feather, Peter & Shank, David, 1999. "Valuation Of Agriculture'S Multi-Site Environmental Impacts: An Application To Pheasant Hunting," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 28(2), October.
- Mullarkey, Daniel J. & Cooper, Joseph C. & Skully, David W., 2001. ""Multifunctionality" and Agriculture: Do Mixed Goals Distort Trade?," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 16(1).
- David Zilberman, 1996. "The Economics of a Public Fund for Environmental Amenities: A Study of CRP Contracts," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(4), pages 961-971.
- Baylis, Katherine R. & Rausser, Gordon C., 2004. "Agri-Environmental Programs In The United States And The European Union," Working Papers 15848, University of British Columbia, Food and Resource Economics.
- Ferraro, Paul J., 2008. "Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 810-821, May.
- Heimlich, Ralph E. & Claassen, Roger, 1998. "Agricultural Conservation Policy At A Crossroads," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 27(1), April.
- Charles H. Barnard & Gerald Whittaker & David Westenbarger & Mary Ahearn, 1997. "Evidence of Capitalization of Direct Government Payments into U.S. Cropland Values," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1642-1650.
- Claassen, Roger & Cattaneo, Andrea & Johansson, Robert, 2008. "Cost-effective design of agri-environmental payment programs: U.S. experience in theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 737-752, May.
- Michael J. Roberts & Shawn Bucholz, 2006. "Slippage in the Conservation Reserve Program or Spurious Correlation? A Rejoinder," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(2), pages 512-514.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:65:y:2008:i:4:p:753-764. 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: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.