IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea09/49356.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Incentives to Supply Enhanced Ecosystem Services from Cropland

Author

Listed:
  • Jolejole, Christina B.
  • Swinton, Scott M.
  • Lupi, Frank

Abstract

This paper examines the willingness of farmers to participate in hypothetical programs that would pay them to adopt cropping practices that enhance provision of ecosystem services from agriculture. A survey of 3,000 Michigan corn and soybean farmers elicited willingness to adopt four sets of cropping practices that reflected increasing levels of environmental stewardship. Acreage enrollments in the programs were modeled using hurdle models. The acreage that farmers would be willing to enroll depends chiefly on farm size and the perception of environmental improvements from the practices. For farms over 500 acres, the payment offered was also a significant inducement to acreage enrollment in all systems examined. This paper advances the literature on adoption of agro-environmental practices by developing a supply function for crop acreage managed for environmental stewardship. Like prior studies of environmental technology adoption in agriculture, we find that environmental attitudes and affiliations, age, education and current farming practices are influential. But we find that the low cost suppliers of environmental services are the largest farms. Agricultural policies based on payment for environmental services that aim for cost-effective environmental impact will likely achieve most of their impact from larger farms.

Suggested Citation

  • Jolejole, Christina B. & Swinton, Scott M. & Lupi, Frank, 2009. "Incentives to Supply Enhanced Ecosystem Services from Cropland," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49356, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea09:49356
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/49356/files/AAEA_Jolejole_618130_ver3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Echessah, Protase N. & Swallow, Brent M. & Kamara, Damaris W. & Curry, John J., 1997. "Willingness to contribute labor and money to tsetse control: Application of contingent valuation in Busia District, Kenya," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 239-253, February.
    2. Gebremedhin, Berhanu & Swinton, Scott M., 2003. "Investment in soil conservation in northern Ethiopia: the role of land tenure security and public programs," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 69-84, July.
    3. Pruckner, Gerald J, 1995. "Agricultural Landscape Cultivation in Austria: An Application of the CVM," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 22(2), pages 173-190.
    4. Norris, Patricia E. & Batie, Sandra S., 1987. "Virginia Farmers' Soil Conservation Decisions: An Application Of Tobit Analysis," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 1-12, July.
    5. Pender, John L. & Kerr, John M., 1998. "Determinants of farmers' indigenous soil and water conservation investments in semi-arid India," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 19(1-2), pages 113-125, September.
    6. G. D. Garrod & K. G. Willis, 1995. "Valuing The Benefits Of The South Downs Environmentally Sensitive Area," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 160-173.
    7. Christine A. Ervin & David E. Ervin, 1982. "Factors Affecting the Use of Soil Conservation Practices: Hypotheses, Evidence, and Policy Implications," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 58(3), pages 277-292.
    8. Steven T. Yen & Andrew M. Jones, 1997. "Household Consumption of Cheese: An Inverse Hyperbolic Sine Double-Hurdle Model with Dependent Errors," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(1), pages 246-251.
    9. Hayley H. Chouinard & Tobias Paterson & Philip R. Wandschneider & Adrienne M. Ohler, 2008. "Will Farmers Trade Profits for Stewardship? Heterogeneous Motivations for Farm Practice Selection," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(1), pages 66-82.
    10. Nick Hanley & David Oglethorpe, 1999. "Emerging Policies on Externalities from Agriculture: An Analysis for the European Union," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1222-1227.
    11. Burton, Michael & Dorsett, Richard & Young, Trevor, 1996. "Changing Preferences for Meat: Evidence from UK Household Data, 1973-93," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 23(3), pages 357-370.
    12. Lin, Tsai-Fen & Schmidt, Peter, 1984. "A Test of the Tobit Specification against an Alternative Suggested by Cragg," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 66(1), pages 174-177, February.
    13. Allen M. Featherstone & Barry K. Goodwin, 1993. "Factors Influencing a Farmer's Decision to Invest in Long-Term Conservation Improvements," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 69(1), pages 67-81.
    14. Robin Gregory & Sarah Lichtenstein & Thomas C. Brown & George L. Peterson & Paul Slovic, 1995. "How Precise Are Monetary Representations of Environmental Improvements?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 71(4), pages 462-473.
    15. Wossink, Ada & Swinton, Scott M., 2007. "Jointness in production and farmers' willingness to supply non-marketed ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 297-304, December.
    16. Bekele, Wagayehu & Drake, Lars, 2003. "Soil and water conservation decision behavior of subsistence farmers in the Eastern Highlands of Ethiopia: a case study of the Hunde-Lafto area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 437-451, October.
    17. JunJie Wu & Bruce A. Babcock, 1998. "The Choice of Tillage, Rotation, and Soil Testing Practices: Economic and Environmental Implications," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(3), pages 494-511.
    18. Laura M. J. McCann & K. William Easter, 1999. "Differences between Farmer and Agency Attitudes Regarding Policies to Reduce Phosphorus Pollution in the Minnesota River Basin," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 21(1), pages 189-207.
    19. Pattanayak, Subhrendu & Evan Mercer, D., 1998. "Valuing soil conservation benefits of agroforestry: contour hedgerows in the Eastern Visayas, Philippines," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 31-46, January.
    20. Luc Valentin & Daniel J. Bernardo & Terry L. Kastens, 2004. "Testing the Empirical Relationship between Best Management Practice Adoption and Farm Profitability," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(4), pages 489-504.
    21. Norris, Patricia E. & Batie, Sandra S., 1987. "Virginia Farmers' Soil Conservation Decisions: An Application of Tobit Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(01), pages 79-90, July.
    22. Yen, Steven T. & Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L., 1997. "An Econometric Analysis Of Donations For Environmental Conservation In Canada," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 0(Number 2), pages 1-18, December.
    23. McIntosh, Christopher S. & Shideed, Kamil H., 1989. "The Effect Of Government Programs On Acreage Response Over Time: The Case Of Corn Production In Iowa," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 1-7, July.
    24. Pender, John L. & Kerr, John M., 1998. "Determinants of farmers' indigenous soil and water conservation investments in semi-arid India," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 19(1-2), pages 113-125, September.
    25. Amemiya, Takeshi, 1981. "Qualitative Response Models: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 1483-1536, December.
    26. Powe, N. A. & Bateman, I. J., 2003. "Ordering effects in nested 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' contingent valuation designs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 255-270, June.
    27. repec:ags:agreko:269415 is not listed on IDEAS
    28. Shiferaw, Bekele & Holden, Stein T., 1998. "Resource degradation and adoption of land conservation technologies in the Ethiopian Highlands: A case study in Andit Tid, North Shewa," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 233-247, May.
    29. 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.
    30. Navrud, StAle & Mungatana, E. D., 1994. "Environmental valuation in developing countries: The recreational value of wildlife viewing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 135-151, November.
    31. Scott M. Swinton & Frank Lupi & G. Philip Robertson & Douglas A. Landis, 2006. "Ecosystem Services from Agriculture: Looking Beyond the Usual Suspects," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1160-1166.
    32. Isabel Vanslembrouck & Guido Huylenbroeck & Wim Verbeke, 2002. "Determinants of the Willingness of Belgian Farmers to Participate in Agri-environmental Measures," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 489-511.
    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. Bachev, Hrabrin, 2010. "Agro-Ecosystem Services – Governance Needs and Efficiency," MPRA Paper 25978, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Duke, Esther Alice & Goldstein, Joshua H. & Teel, Tara L. & Finchum, Ryan & Huber-Stearns, Heidi & Pitty, Jorge & Rodríguez P., Gladys Beatriz & Rodríguez, Samuel & Sánchez, Luis Olmedo, 2014. "Payments for ecosystem services and landowner interest: Informing program design trade-offs in Western Panama," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 44-55.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aaea09:49356. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.