IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i15p8181-d598888.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost of Extending the Farm Accountancy Data Network to the Farm Sustainability Data Network: Empirical Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Hans Vrolijk

    (Wageningen Economic Research, Wageningen University and Research, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands)

  • Krijn Poppe

    (Wageningen Economic Research, Wageningen University and Research, 6708 PB Wageningen, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The European Green Deal, its Farm to Fork strategy and Biodiversity strategy will set the scene for the future revisions of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The CAP will address an increasing set of objectives, including contributing to the Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris climate agreement. To enable evidence-based policy making and monitoring, the Farm to Fork strategy proposes to extend the current monitoring system to include a broader range of sustainability issues. The current monitoring system called Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) has a strong focus on financial and economic data. The FADN is an instrument for monitoring and evaluation of the EU Common Agricultural Policy and collects bookkeeping results from 80,000 farms. The extension to a Farm Sustainability Data Network (FSDN) should include a broader set of indicators on the sustainability performance of farms. This paper estimates the costs of collecting this broader set of sustainability indicators in the FSDN based on the experiences of a pilot in 9 member states and a survey among all member states. The results show that collecting the sustainability data from all farms included in FADN would increase the costs by about 40%. The results show large differences between countries depending on the current costs of data collection and the expected additional work to include sustainability indicators. Given the pressing need for these data, a scenario was developed where sustainability data are collected from a subsample of 15,000 farms. This can be achieved within current budget limits if the current FADN sample would be reduced from 85,000 to 75,000 farms. The discussion section addresses some concerns raised on the extension of FADN to FSDN such as: willingness of farmers, administrative burden, economic background of FADN and the quality of the data.

Suggested Citation

  • Hans Vrolijk & Krijn Poppe, 2021. "Cost of Extending the Farm Accountancy Data Network to the Farm Sustainability Data Network: Empirical Evidence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-13, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8181-:d:598888
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8181/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8181/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johannes Sauer & Hans Vrolijk, 2019. "Innovation and performance – evidence at micro level," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(43), pages 4673-4699, September.
    2. Shingo Kimura & Christine Le Thi, 2013. "Cross Country Analysis of Farm Economic Performance," OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 60, OECD Publishing.
    3. Shingo Kimura & Jesús Antón & Christine LeThi, 2010. "Farm Level Analysis of Risk and Risk Management Strategies and Policies: Cross Country Analysis," OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 26, OECD Publishing.
    4. Koester, Ulrich & Loy, Jens-Peter, 2016. "Policy evaluation on the basis of the Farm Accountancy Data Network," IAMO Policy Briefs 29e, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    5. Herrera, Beatriz & Gerster-Bentaya, Maria & Knierim, Andrea, 2016. "Stakeholders’ perceptions of sustainability measurement at farm level," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 118(3), pages 1-7, December.
    6. van der Meulen, Harold & van Asseldonk, Marcel & Ge, Lan, 2016. "The state of innovation in European agriculture: Innovators are few and far between," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 118(3), pages 1-3, December.
    7. Brennan, Noreen & Ryan, Mary & Hennessy, Thia & Cullen, Paula & Dillon, Emma, 2016. "Going beyond FADN: The use of additional data to gain insights into extension service use across European Union Member States," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 118(3), pages 1-9, December.
    8. Latruffe, Laure & Diazabakana, Ambre & Bockstaller, Christian & Desjeux, Yann & Finn, John & Kelly, Edel & Ryan, Mary & Uthes, Sandra, 2016. "Measurement of sustainability in agriculture: a review of indicators," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 118(3), pages 1-8, December.
    9. Koester, Ulrich & Loy, Jens-Peter, 2016. "Policy evaluation on the basis of the Farm Accountancy Data Network," IAMO Policy Briefs 249969, Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    10. Herrera, B. & Gerster-Bentaya, M. & Knierim, A., 2016. "Stakeholders’ perceptions of sustainability measurement at farm level," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 51, March.
    11. O'Donoghue, Cathal & Devisme, Simon & Ryan, Mary & Conneely, Ricky & Gillespie, Patrick & Vrolijk, Hans, 2016. "Farm economic sustainability in the European Union: A pilot study," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 118(3), pages 1-9, December.
    12. Franks, J.R. & Collis, Jimi, 2003. "On-Farm Benchmarking: How to Do It and How to Do It Better," 14th Congress, Perth, Western Australia, August 10-15, 2003 24326, International Farm Management Association.
    13. van Asseldonk, Marcel & Tzouramani, Irini & Ge, Lan & Vrolijk, Hans, 2016. "Adoption of risk management strategies in European agriculture," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 118(3), pages 1-9, December.
    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. Roberto Cagliero & Andrea Arzeni & Federica Cisilino & Alessandro Montelelone & Patrizia Borsotto, 2021. "Ten years after: Diffusion, criticism and potential improvements in the use of FADN for Rural Development assessment in Italy," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 23(3), pages 1-24.
    2. Krijn Poppe & Hans Vrolijk & Nicole de Graaf & Roeland van Dijk & Emma Dillon & Trevor Donnellan, 2022. "Sustainability Monitoring with Robotic Accounting—Integration of Financial and Environmental Farm Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Olena Liakh, 2021. "Accountability through Sustainability Data Governance: Reconfiguring Reporting to Better Account for the Digital Acceleration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-18, 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. Ogawa, Keishi & Garrod, Guy & Yagi, Hironori, 2023. "Sustainability strategies and stakeholder management for upland farming," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    2. Krijn Poppe & Hans Vrolijk, 2018. "Microdata: a critical source for policy evaluation," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 17(1), pages 28-35, April.
    3. Arzeni, Andrea & Ascione, Elisa & Borsotto, Patrizia & Carta, Valentina & Castellotti, Tatiana & Vagnozzi, Anna, 2021. "Analysis of farms characteristics related to innovation needs: a proposal for supporting the public decision-making process," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    4. Vaida Sapolaite & Armands Veveris & Artiom Volkov & Virginia Namiotko, 2019. "Dynamics in the Agricultural Sectors of the Baltic States: the Effects of the Common Agricultural Policy and Challenges for the Future," Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), vol. 15(4), pages 211-223.
    5. Jindrich Spicka & Tomas Hlavsa & Katerina Soukupova & Marie Stolbova, 2019. "Approaches to estimation the farm-level economic viability and sustainability in agriculture: A literature review," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 65(6), pages 289-297.
    6. Jindřich Špička, 2018. "How Do Agricultural Biogas Investments Affect Czech Farms?," Central European Business Review, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2018(4), pages 34-60.
    7. Tomas Hlavsa & Jindrich Spicka & Marie Stolbova & Zuzana Hlouskova, 2020. "Statistical analysis of economic viability of farms operating in Czech areas facing natural constraints," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 66(5), pages 193-202.
    8. Beatriz Herrera Sabillón & Maria Gerster‐Bentaya & Andrea Knierim, 2022. "Measuring farmers' well‐being: Influence of farm‐level factors on satisfaction with work and quality of life," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(2), pages 452-471, June.
    9. Ana MARTA-COSTA & Vitor MARTINHO & Micael SANTOS, 2017. "Productive Efficiency Of Portuguese Vineyard Regions," Regional Science Inquiry, Hellenic Association of Regional Scientists, vol. 0(2), pages 97-107, December.
    10. Sulewski, Piotr & Kłoczko-Gajewska, Anna, 2018. "Relations between agri-environmental, economic and social dimensions of farm sustainability," 166th Seminar, August 30-31, 2018, Galway, West of Ireland 276202, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Tangermann, Stefan, 2011. "Risk Management in Agriculture and the Future of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy," National Policies, Trade and Sustainable Development 320171, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD).
    12. Agnieszka Wojewódzka-Wiewiórska & Anna Kłoczko-Gajewska & Piotr Sulewski, 2019. "Between the Social and Economic Dimensions of Sustainability in Rural Areas—In Search of Farmers’ Quality of Life," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, December.
    13. El Benni, Nadja & Finger, Robert, 2014. "Where is the risk? Price, yield and cost risk in Swiss crop production," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 95(3).
    14. Mauro Vigani & Manuel Gomez-Barbero & Emilio Rodríguez-Cerezo, 2015. "The determinants of wheat yields: the role of sustainable innovation, policies and risks in France and Hungary," JRC Research Reports JRC95950, Joint Research Centre.
    15. Marta Guth & Katarzyna Smędzik-Ambroży & Bazyli Czyżewski & Sebastian Stępień, 2020. "The Economic Sustainability of Farms under Common Agricultural Policy in the European Union Countries," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-20, January.
    16. Geoffroy Enjolras & Philippe Madiès, 2020. "The role of bank analysts and scores in the prediction of financial distress: Evidence from French farms," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(4), pages 2978-2993.
    17. Li, Mo & Fu, Qiang & Singh, Vijay P. & Liu, Dong & Li, Jiang, 2020. "Optimization of sustainable bioenergy production considering energy-food-water-land nexus and livestock manure under uncertainty," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    18. Stylianou, Andreas & Sdrali, Despina & Apostolopoulos, Constantinos D., 2020. "Capturing the diversity of Mediterranean farming systems prior to their sustainability assessment: The case of Cyprus," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    19. Franz Sinabell, 2014. "Eine Auswahl von Nachhaltigkeitsindikatoren für die österreichische Land- und Forstwirtschaft im internationalen Vergleich," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47124, April.
    20. Frýd, Lukáš & Sokol, Ondřej, 2021. "Relationships between technical efficiency and subsidies for Czech farms: A two-stage robust approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8181-:d:598888. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.