IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v11y1998i2p135-153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating the Supply of Environmental Benefits by Agriculture: A French Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • F. Bonnieux
  • P. Rainelli
  • D. Vermersch

Abstract

There has been an increasing public interest in promoting the supply of environmental benefits by agriculture. The Environmentally Sensitive Area scheme addresses this challenge by offering farmers voluntary agreements: entrants are compensated for complying with a package of prescribed farming practices designed to secure conservation goals. This paper emphasizes the uptake of agreements from two perspectives: (i) ex post, it considers why some eligible farmers join a proposed scheme and why some do not, (ii) ex ante, it discusses how non-eligible farmers would behave if they were proposed a well-defined scheme. Ex post perspective refers to farmers' actual behaviour which is observed by the environmental agency, whereas the ex ante perspective is related to their contingent one. A single economic model is derived to deal with both cases. Econometric results from a French case study with respect to wetland preservation are given. There is some consistency between the empirical results obtained in both cases, and to some extent it may be argued that contingent behaviour predicts the actual one. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Suggested Citation

  • F. Bonnieux & P. Rainelli & D. Vermersch, 1998. "Estimating the Supply of Environmental Benefits by Agriculture: A French Case Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 135-153, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:11:y:1998:i:2:p:135-153
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1008214013617
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1008214013617
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Fulginiti, Lilyan & Perrin, Richard, 1993. "The Theory and Measurement of Producer Response under Quotas," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(1), pages 97-106, February.
    2. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    3. Lau, Lawrence J., 1976. "A characterization of the normalized restricted profit function," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 131-163, February.
    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. Christensen, Jan, 2002. "Theory of Contracts and Agri-Environment Policies: A Budget Restriction Alters Standard Results of Mechanisms Design Theory," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24882, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Unay Gailhard, Ilkay & Bavorova, Miroslava & Pirscher, Frauke, 2012. "The Influence of Communication Frequency with Social Network Actors on the Continuous Innovation Adoption: Organic Farmers in Germany," 131st Seminar, September 18-19, 2012, Prague, Czech Republic 135786, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Élodie Letort & Chalachew Temesgen, 2014. "Influence of environmental policies on farmland prices in the Bretagne region of France," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 95(1), pages 77-109.
    4. P. Dupraz & D. Vermersch & B. De Frahan & L. Delvaux, 2003. "The Environmental Supply of Farm Households: A Flexible Willingness to Accept Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(2), pages 171-189, June.
    5. Defrancesco, Edi & Gatto, Paola & Runge, C. Ford & Trestini, Samuele, 2006. "Factors Affecting Farmers' Participation in Agri-Environmental Measures: Evidence from a Case Study," Conference Papers 6688, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.
    6. Calvet, Coralie & Le Coent, Philippe & Napoleone, Claude & Quétier, Fabien, 2019. "Challenges of achieving biodiversity offset outcomes through agri-environmental schemes: Evidence from an empirical study in Southern France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 113-125.
    7. Menozzi, Davide & Fioravanzi, Martina & Donati, Michele, 2015. "Farmer’s motivation to adopt sustainable agricultural practices," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 4(2), pages 1-23, August.
    8. Barreiro-Hurlé, Jesús & Espinosa-Goded, Maria & Dupraz, Pierre, 2008. "Does Intensity Of Change Matter? Factors Affecting Adoption In Two Agri-Environmental Schemes," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6458, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Lizin, Sebastien & Van Passel, Steven & Schreurs, Eloi, 2015. "Farmres' Perceived Cost of Land Use restrictions: A Simulated Purchasing Decision Using Dscrete Choice Experiments," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212054, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Jongeneel, Roelof A. & Polman, Nico B.P. & Slangen, Louis H.G., 2005. "Why Are Farmers Going Multifunctional?," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24585, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Johst, Karin & Drechsler, Martin & Watzold, Frank, 2002. "An ecological-economic modelling procedure to design compensation payments for the efficient spatio-temporal allocation of species protection measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 37-49, April.
    12. Desjeux, Yann & Dupraz, Pierre & Latruffe, Laure & Maigne, Elise & Cahuzac, Eric, 2014. "Evaluating the impact of rural development measures on farm labour use: a spatial approach," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182817, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Mooney, Daniel F. & Barham, Bradford L., 2013. "What Drives the Adoption of Clean Agricultural Technologies? An Ex Ante Assessment of Sustainable Biofuel Production in Southwestern Wisconsin," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150557, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Amigues, Jean-Pierre & Boulatoff (Broadhead), Catherine & Desaigues, Brigitte & Gauthier, Caroline & Keith, John E., 2002. "The benefits and costs of riparian analysis habitat preservation: a willingness to accept/willingness to pay contingent valuation approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 17-31, November.
    15. Yrjola, Tapani & Kola, Jukka, 2002. "Social Benefits of Multifunctional Agriculture in Finland," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24812, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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. Squires, Dale, 2016. "Firm behavior under quantity controls: The theory of virtual quantities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 70-86.
    2. Xavier Delache & Catherine Goudounèche & Hervé Guyomard & Xavier Irz & Louis-Pascal Mahé, 1995. "Analyse micro-économique d'un marché des droits à produire en agriculture : application aux quotas laitiers en France," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 117(1), pages 61-75.
    3. Barbara Hutniczak & Niels Vestergaard & Dale Squires, 2019. "Policy Change Anticipation in the Buyback Context," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(1), pages 111-132, May.
    4. Yue Ma & Shu Kam Lee & Hing Lin Chan, 2003. "Estimating Firm Behavior under Rationing: a Panel Data Study of the Chinese Manufacturing Industry," Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 221-244.
    5. Raper, Kellie Curry & Love, H. Alan, 1999. "MONOPSONY POWER IN MULTIPLE INPUT MARKETS: A Nonparametric Approach," Staff Paper Series 11656, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    6. Jae Kim & Seung-Nam Kim & Soogwan Doh, 2015. "The distance decay of willingness to pay and the spatial distribution of benefits and costs for the ecological restoration of an urban branch stream in Ulsan, South Korea," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 54(3), pages 835-853, May.
    7. Bateman, Ian J. & Langford, Ian H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Kerr, Geoffrey N., 2001. "Bound and path effects in double and triple bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 191-213, July.
    8. Jongeneel, Roelof A. & Ge, Lan, 2005. "Explaining Growth in Dutch Agriculture: Prices, Public R&D, and Technological Change," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24573, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Sung-Min Kim & Ju-Hee Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2020. "Households’ Willingness to Pay for Substituting Natural Gas with Renewable Methane: A Contingent Valuation Experiment in South Korea," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, June.
    10. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    11. Lee, Myunghun, 2011. "Measurement of market power for the environmentally regulated Korean iron and steel manufacturing industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 249-254, September.
    12. Dagnew Hagos & Alemu Mekonnen & Zenebe G/egziabhe, 2014. "Households Willingness to Pay for Improved Urban Solid Waste Management: the Case of Mekelle City, Ethiopia," Ethiopian Journal of Economics, Ethiopian Economics Association, vol. 22(1), November.
    13. 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.
    14. Ritten, Chian Jones & Breunig, Ian M., 2013. "Willingness to Pay for Programs for the Human Papillomavirus Vaccine on a Rocky Mountain West College Campus," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15.
    15. Otieno, David & Ogutu, Sylvester, 2015. "Consumer willingness to pay for animal welfare attributes in a developing country context: The case of chicken in Nairobi, Kenya," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212602, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. MacMillan, Douglas & Hanley, Nick & Buckland, Steve, 1995. "Valuing Biodiversity Losses Due To Acid Deposition: A Contingent Valuation Study Of Uncertain Environmental Gains," Discussion Papers in Ecological Economics 140539, University of Stirling, Department of Economics.
    17. Brian Witt, 2019. "Tourists’ Willingness to Pay Increased Entrance Fees at Mexican Protected Areas: A Multi-Site Contingent Valuation Study," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(11), pages 1-22, May.
    18. Franz Hackl & Gerald J. Pruckner, 2005. "Warm glow, free‐riding and vehicle neutrality in a health‐related contingent valuation study," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 293-306, March.
    19. Kai-Lih Chen, 1999. "Measuring values of wetlands in Taiwan," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 2(1), pages 65-89, March.
    20. Aravena, Claudia & Hutchinson, W. George & Carlsson, Fredrik & Matthews, David I, 2015. "Testing preference formation in learning design contingent valuation (LDCV) using advanced information and repetitivetreatments," Working Papers in Economics 619, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.

    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:kap:enreec:v:11:y:1998:i:2:p:135-153. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.