IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agfoec/v2y2014i1p1-1310.1186-s40100-014-0018-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bioenergy chain building: a collective action perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Luigi Cembalo
  • Francesco Caracciolo
  • Giuseppina Migliore
  • Alessia Lombardi
  • Giorgio Schifani

Abstract

Depletion of natural resources has become a key issue on the European policy agenda. Bottom-up measures have emerged in several countries with a view to promoting awareness campaigns and environmental sustainability, with the agenda set by individuals who start up collective initiatives at the local level. Such collective action provides an incentive to free-ride on the contribution of others. Social norms and the consequent behavior of individuals involved in collective action assume a key role in ensuring sustainable use of a public good, achieving significant, long-lasting success. The present study aims to ascertain which determinants most affect farmers’ willingness to contribute to common resources. The empirical study was conducted in an area in the province of Avellino (southern Italy) most affected by soil erosion problems. The study focused on the willingness of farmers to contribute to the public good through biomass production (Giant Cane). In all, 175 face-to-face questionnaires were administered to farmers in September-November 2013. Schwartz’s norm-activation model variables were collected. A Tobit model was implemented in which the dependent variable was the land farmers stated they were willing to cultivate with Giant Cane. Four on five psychological constructs, based on the NAM, proved statistically significant with the expected sign, showing that an altruistic behavioral approach is useful to predict the individual’s decision to adopt cooperation norms. Copyright Cembalo et al.; licensee Springer. 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Luigi Cembalo & Francesco Caracciolo & Giuseppina Migliore & Alessia Lombardi & Giorgio Schifani, 2014. "Bioenergy chain building: a collective action perspective," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 2(1), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agfoec:v:2:y:2014:i:1:p:1-13:10.1186/s40100-014-0018-x
    DOI: 10.1186/s40100-014-0018-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1186/s40100-014-0018-x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s40100-014-0018-x?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pretty, Jules & Ward, Hugh, 2001. "Social Capital and the Environment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 209-227, February.
    2. Ostrom, Elinor, 2010. "Revising theory in light of experimental findings," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 68-72, January.
    3. Blamey, Russell, 1998. "Contingent valuation and the activation of environmental norms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 47-72, January.
    4. Dawes, Robyn M. & Orbell, John M. & Simmons, Randy T. & Van De Kragt, Alphons J. C., 1986. "Organizing Groups for Collective Action," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(4), pages 1171-1185, December.
    5. Masako Fujiie & Yujiro Hayami & Masao Kikuchi, 2005. "The conditions of collective action for local commons management: the case of irrigation in the Philippines," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 33(2), pages 179-189, September.
    6. Elinor Ostrom, 2000. "Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 137-158, Summer.
    7. Francesco Caracciolo & Pasquale Lombardi, 2012. "A new-institutional framework to explore the trade-off between agriculture, environment and landscape," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2012(3), pages 135-154.
    8. Kotchen, Matthew J. & Moore, Michael R., 2007. "Private provision of environmental public goods: Household participation in green-electricity programs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 1-16, January.
    9. Gibson, Clark C. & Williams, John T. & Ostrom, Elinor, 2005. "Local Enforcement and Better Forests," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 273-284, February.
    10. Antinori, Camille & Bray, David Barton, 2005. "Community forest enterprises as entrepreneurial Firms: Economic and institutional perspectives from Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    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. Forte, Annachiara & Zucaro, Amalia & Faugno, Salvatore & Basosi, Riccardo & Fierro, Angelo, 2018. "Carbon footprint and fossil energy consumption of bio-ethanol fuel production from Arundo donax L. crops on marginal lands of Southern Italy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 222-235.
    2. Giuseppe Di Vita & Manuela Pilato & Biagio Pecorino & Filippo Brun & Mario D’Amico, 2017. "A Review of the Role of Vegetal Ecosystems in CO 2 Capture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-10, October.
    3. Maria Raimondo & Francesco Caracciolo & Luigi Cembalo & Gaetano Chinnici & Biagio Pecorino & Mario D’Amico, 2018. "Making Virtue Out of Necessity: Managing the Citrus Waste Supply Chain for Bioeconomy Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, 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. Wang, Yahua & Chen, Chunliang & Araral, Eduardo, 2016. "The Effects of Migration on Collective Action in the Commons: Evidence from Rural China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 79-93.
    2. Siegwart Lindenberg, 2014. "Sustainable cooperation needs tinkering with both rules and social motivation," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 71-81, April.
    3. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2006. "Environmental Morale and Motivation," CREMA Working Paper Series 2006-17, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    4. Okumu, Boscow & Muchapondwa, Edwin, 2017. "Determinants of Successful Collective Management of Forest Resources: Evidence from Kenyan Community Forest Associations," EfD Discussion Paper 17-11, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    5. Tsusaka, Takuji W. & Kajisa, Kei & Pede, Valerien O. & Aoyagi, Keitaro, 2015. "Neighborhood effects and social behavior: The case of irrigated and rainfed farmers in Bohol, the Philippines," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 227-246.
    6. Elinor Ostrom, 2010. "Analyzing collective action," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(s1), pages 155-166, November.
    7. Macqueen, Duncan & Bolin, Anna & Greijmans, Martin & Grouwels, Sophie & Humphries, Shoana, 2020. "Innovations towards prosperity emerging in locally controlled forest business models and prospects for scaling up," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    8. Cox, Caleb A. & Stoddard, Brock, 2018. "Strategic thinking in public goods games with teams," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 31-43.
    9. da Silva Medina, Gabriel & Pokorny, Benno & Campbell, Bruce, 2022. "Forest governance in the Amazon: Favoring the emergence of local management systems," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    10. H. Carolyn Peach Brown & James P. Lassoie & Steven A. Wolf, 2007. "An analytic approach to structuring co–management of community forests in Cameroon," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 7(2), pages 135-154, April.
    11. Dekel, Sagi & Fischer, Sven & Zultan, Ro’i, 2017. "Potential Pareto Public Goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 87-96.
    12. Antinori, Camille M. & Rausser, Gordon C., 2010. "The Mexican Common Property Forestry Sector," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt8qh479p8, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    13. Nielsen, Martin Reinhardt & Treue, Thorsten, 2012. "Hunting for the Benefits of Joint Forest Management in the Eastern Afromontane Biodiversity Hotspot: Effects on Bushmeat Hunters and Wildlife in the Udzungwa Mountains," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 1224-1239.
    14. Torgler, Benno & Garcia-Valinas, Maria A. & Macintyre, Alison, 2008. "Environmental Participation and Environmental Motivation," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 46652, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    15. Maja Schl�ter & Alessandro Tavoni & Simon Levin, 2014. "Robustness of norm-driven cooperation in the commons to environmental variability," GRI Working Papers 146, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    16. Giovanni Maccarrone & Marco A. Marini & Ornella Tarola, 2023. "Shop Until You Drop: the Unexpected Effects of Anticonsumerism and Environmentalism," Working Papers 2023.01, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    17. Bonnie Averbuch & Martin Hvarregaard Thorsøe & Chris Kjeldsen, 2022. "Using fuzzy cognitive mapping and social capital to explain differences in sustainability perceptions between farmers in the northeast US and Denmark," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 435-453, March.
    18. Zang, Liangzhen, 2021. "How Does Farmland Fragmentation Affect Collective Action in Rural Areas of China," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 314962, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Tsusaka, Takuji W. & Kajisa, Kei & Pede, Valerien O. & Aoyagi, Keitaro, 2013. "Neighbourhood effects and social behaviour: the case of irrigated and rainfed farmeres in Bohol, the Philippines," MPRA Paper 50130, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Rahman, H.M. Tuihedur & Hickey, Gordon M. & Sarker, Swapan Kumar, 2012. "A framework for evaluating collective action and informal institutional dynamics under a resource management policy of decentralization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 32-41.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:spr:agfoec:v:2:y:2014:i:1:p:1-13:10.1186/s40100-014-0018-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.