IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nec/raestu/v94y2013i02p195-219_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The role of risk aversion and labor constraints in the adoption of low input practices supported by the CAP green payments in cash crop farms

Author

Listed:
  • Ridier, Aude
  • Ben El Ghali, Mohamed
  • Nguyen, G.
  • Kephaliacos, Charilaos

Abstract

Since the late 1980s, many alternative practices have been proposed to European farmers to reduce pesticide and input use in general. These practices have been promoted by agro-environmental contracts signed between individual farmers and the European Union and by which farmers engage themselves in changing their practices. The adoption rate of these measures has remained very low in many European regions particularly in Southwestern France. This article aims at stressing the role played by risk attitude and labor constraint in farmers’ adoption decision. After presenting a static theoretical model which assesses the impact of labor constraints and risk attitude on the level of adoption of low input practices supported by agro-environmental contracts, the article proposes a numerical application based on a mathematical programming risk-model implemented on two typical crop farms in South-western France. Three kinds of contracts (no tillage, long rotation, lower pest treatments) are tested, two of them (long rotation and lower pest treatments) aiming at directly reducing input use. The results show that, despite the overall positive impact of alternative practices under contract on environment and farmers’ income, increased yield variability under positive risk aversion and larger labor requirements are actual barriers to adoption.

Suggested Citation

  • Ridier, Aude & Ben El Ghali, Mohamed & Nguyen, G. & Kephaliacos, Charilaos, 2013. "The role of risk aversion and labor constraints in the adoption of low input practices supported by the CAP green payments in cash crop farms," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 94(02), pages 195-219, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:nec:raestu:v:94:y:2013:i:02:p:195-219_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.necplus.eu/abstract_S1966960713012034
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Chapter 11 Technological change and the environment," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.),Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 461-516, Elsevier.
    2. Quiggin, John C., 2001. "Environmental economics and the Murray-Darling river system," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(1), pages 1-28.
    3. Sunding, David & Zilberman, David, 2001. "The agricultural innovation process: Research and technology adoption in a changing agricultural sector," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.),Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 4, pages 207-261, Elsevier.
    4. Just, Richard E. & Pope, Rulon D., 1978. "Stochastic specification of production functions and economic implications," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 67-86, February.
    5. Sandmo, Agnar, 1971. "On the Theory of the Competitive Firm under Price Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 65-73, March.
    6. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    7. G Lien & JB Hardaker, 2001. "Whole-farm planning under uncertainty: impacts of subsidy scheme and utility function on portfolio choice in Norwegian agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 28(1), pages 17-36, March.
    8. 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.
    9. Chavas, Jean-Paul & Holt, Matthew T, 1996. "Economic Behavior under Uncertainty: A Joint Analysis of Risk Preferences and Technology," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(2), pages 329-335, May.
    10. Hardaker, J. Brian & Pandey, Sushil & Patten, Louise H., 1991. "Farm Planning under Uncertainty: A Review of Alternative Programming Models," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(01), pages 1-14, April.
    11. Richard D. Horan & James S. Shortle & David G. Abler, 1999. "Green Payments for Nonpoint Pollution Control," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1210-1215.
    12. Jorge Fernandez-Cornejo & Sharon Jans & Mark Smith, 1998. "Issues in the Economics of Pesticide Use in Agriculture: A Review of the Empirical Evidence," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(2), pages 462-488.
    13. 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.
    14. Lohr, Luanne & Park, Timothy & Higley, Leon, 1999. "Farmer risk assessment for voluntary insecticide reduction," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 121-130, July.
    15. David K. Lambert & Bruce A. McCarl, 1985. "Risk Modeling Using Direct Solution of Nonlinear Approximations of the Utility Function," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 67(4), pages 846-852.
    16. Aude Ridier & Charilaos Kephaliacos & Francoise Carpy-Goulard, 2011. "Private transaction costs and environmental cross compliance in a crop region of Southwestern France," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(1/2), pages 68-79.
    17. Petr Havlik & Geoffroy Enjolras & Jean-Marie Boisson & Florence Jacquet & Michel Lherm & Patrick Veysset, 2008. "Environmental good production in the optimum activities portfolio of a risk averse-farmer," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 86(1), pages 9-33.
    18. Thomas B. Wiens, 1976. "Peasant Risk Aversion and Allocative Behavior: A Quadratic Programming Experiment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 58(4_Part_1), pages 629-635.
    19. de Koeijer, T. J. & Wossink, G. A. A. & van Ittersum, M. K. & Struik, P. C. & Renkema, J. A., 1999. "A conceptual model for analysing input-output coefficients in arable farming systems: from diagnosis towards design," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 33-44, July.
    20. Pannell, David J. & Malcolm, Bill & Kingwell, Ross S., 2000. "Are we risking too much? Perspectives on risk in farm modelling," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 69-78, June.
    21. Szvetlana Acs & Paul Berentsen & Ruud Huirne & Marcel van Asseldonk, 2009. "Effect of yield and price risk on conversion from conventional to organic farming ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(3), pages 393-411, July.
    22. Petr Havlik & Geoffroy Enjolras & Jean-Marie Boisson & Florence Jacquet & Michel Lherm & Patrick Veysset, 2008. "Environmental good production in the optimum activities portfolio of a risk averse-farmer," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 86(1), pages 9-33.
    23. Hardaker, J. Brian & Lien, Gudbrand D., 2007. "Rationalising Risk Assessment: Applications to Agricultural Business," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 15.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • C67 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Input-Output Models
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    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:nec:raestu:v:94:y:2013:i:02:p:195-219_01. 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: (Jean-Louis Soubret). General contact details of provider: http://www.necplus.eu/jid_RAEProvider-Email:jlsoubret@necplus.eu .

    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.