IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aes026/397877.html

Cost-effectiveness of a market in spatially targeted natural flood management is robust to moderate transaction costs

Author

Listed:
  • Leppert, Daniel
  • Aftab, Ashar
  • Scarpa, Riccardo

Abstract

Agriculture can contribute to catchment flooding via land use change. The viability of natural flood management (NFM) projects differs substantially between farms, which motivates research into spatially targeted NFM schemes. This paper proposes a hypothetical market in NFM contracts with exchange rates (‘trading ratios’) that incentivise farmers to voluntarily reallocate NFM contracts to farms where the land is most suitable for NFM. Voluntary trading is theorised to alleviate concerns expressed by farmers about unfairness with targeted payments for flood management. This is the first cost-effectiveness analysis of a hypothetical market in NFM. The cost is estimated through a discrete choice experiment with a representative sample of English farmers. The effectiveness of NFM is simulated using a hydrological connectivity computer model. Results show that trading can represent significant annual cost saving per farm across simulated schemes. A higher transaction cost reduces the cost savings achievable from trading, although even at 10% of the payment, trading reduces the overall cost by no less than £10,000 annually.

Suggested Citation

  • Leppert, Daniel & Aftab, Ashar & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2026. "Cost-effectiveness of a market in spatially targeted natural flood management is robust to moderate transaction costs," 100th Annual Conference, March 23-25, 2026, Wadham College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK 397877, Agricultural Economics Society (AES).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aes026:397877
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.397877
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/397877/files/Daniel_Leppert_Leppert%20AES%20full%20paper.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.397877?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pengfei Liu & Xiaohui Tian, 2021. "Downward Hypothetical Bias in the Willingness to Accept Measure for Private Goods: Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(5), pages 1679-1699, October.
    2. Daniel Leppert, 2023. "“No fences make bad neighbors” but markets make better ones: cap-and-trade reduces cross-border SO2 in a natural experiment," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 25(3), pages 407-433, July.
    3. Clements, Jen & Lobley, Matt & Osborne, Juliet & Wills, Jane, 2021. "How can academic research on UK agri-environment schemes pivot to meet the addition of climate mitigation aims?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    4. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Nudging farmers to enrol land into agri-environmental schemes: the role of a collective bonus," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 43(4), pages 609-636.
    5. Campbell, Danny & Boeri, Marco & Doherty, Edel & George Hutchinson, W., 2015. "Learning, fatigue and preference formation in discrete choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 345-363.
    6. Kenneth Y. Chay & Michael Greenstone, 2003. "The Impact of Air Pollution on Infant Mortality: Evidence from Geographic Variation in Pollution Shocks Induced by a Recession," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(3), pages 1121-1167.
    7. Holland, Stephen P. & Yates, Andrew J., 2015. "Optimal trading ratios for pollution permit markets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 16-27.
    8. Edwin F. Ulveling & Lehman B. Fletcher, 1970. "A Cobb-Douglas Production Function with Variable Returns to Scale," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 52(2), pages 322-326.
    9. Tina L. Saitone & Richard J. Sexton, 2010. "Product Differentiation and Quality in Food Markets: Industrial Organization Implications," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 341-368, October.
    10. Stranlund, John K & Chavez, Carlos A, 2000. "Effective Enforcement of a Transferable Emissions Permit System with a Self-Reporting Requirement," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 113-131, September.
    11. Richard Carson & Theodore Groves, 2007. "Incentive and informational properties of preference questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 181-210, May.
    12. Eric Ruto & Guy Garrod, 2009. "Investigating farmers' preferences for the design of agri-environment schemes: a choice experiment approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(5), pages 631-647.
    13. Mike Burton & Dan Rigby, 2009. "Hurdle and Latent Class Approaches to Serial Non-Participation in Choice Models," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 42(2), pages 211-226, February.
    14. Broadmeadow, Samantha & Nisbet, Tom & Palmer, Robert & Webb, Louise & Short, Chris & Chivers, Charlotte-Anne & Hammond, John & Lukac, Martin & Miller, Anne & Gantlett, Richard & Clark, Joanna, 2023. "Incorporating technical and farmer knowledge to improve land use and management for natural flood management in lowland catchments," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    15. Catherine L. Kling, 2011. "Economic Incentives to Improve Water Quality in Agricultural Landscapes: Some New Variations on Old Ideas," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 297-309.
    16. Posthumus, H. & Hewett, C.J.M. & Morris, J. & Quinn, P.F., 2008. "Agricultural land use and flood risk management: Engaging with stakeholders in North Yorkshire," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 787-798, July.
    17. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2025. "Lessons Learned from Three Decades of Experience with Cap and Trade," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Economics of Environment, Climate Change, and Wine Selected Papers of Robert N Stavins Volume 3 (2011–2023), chapter 9, pages 235-264, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    18. Axhausen, Kay W. & Hess, Stephane & König, Arnd & Abay, Georg & Bates, John J. & Bierlaire, Michel, 2008. "Income and distance elasticities of values of travel time savings: New Swiss results," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 173-185, May.
    19. Granado-Díaz, Rubén & Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Colombo, Sergio, 2024. "Land manager preferences for outcome-based payments for environmental services in oak savannahs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    20. McFadden, Daniel, 1974. "The measurement of urban travel demand," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 303-328, November.
    21. Anastasio J. Villanueva & Klaus Glenk & Macario Rodríguez-Entrena, 2017. "Protest Responses and Willingness to Accept: Ecosystem Services Providers’ Preferences towards Incentive-Based Schemes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 801-821, September.
    22. Tietenberg, T H, 1990. "Economic Instruments for Environmental Regulation," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 6(1), pages 17-33, Spring.
    23. Nguyen, Chi & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Hanley, Nick & Iftekhar, Sayed, 2025. "Conservation auctions for landscape-scale environmental management: Does spatial configuration matter for economic and ecological outcomes?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    24. Christian A. Vossler & Maurice Doyon & Daniel Rondeau, 2012. "Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 145-171, November.
    25. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    26. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    27. Lloyd-Smith, Patrick & Adamowicz, Wiktor, 2018. "Can stated measures of willingness-to-accept be valid? Evidence from laboratory experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 133-149.
    28. Yacob A. Zereyesus & Allen M. Featherstone, 2017. "Empirical analysis of profit maximization and cost minimization behaviour of Kansas farms," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(17), pages 1255-1258, October.
    29. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2025. "The SO2 Allowance Trading System: The Ironic History of a Grand Policy Experiment," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Economics of Environment, Climate Change, and Wine Selected Papers of Robert N Stavins Volume 3 (2011–2023), chapter 8, pages 209-233, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    30. Jeremy Franks, 2011. "The collective provision of environmental goods: a discussion of contractual issues," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(5), pages 637-660.
    31. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Vic Adamowicz, 1998. "Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 413-428, April.
    32. Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene & Kenneth Train, 2008. "Utility in Willingness to Pay Space: A Tool to Address Confounding Random Scale Effects in Destination Choice to the Alps," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), pages 994-1010.
    33. Anastasio J. Villanueva & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & Macario Rodríguez-Entrena, 2025. "Impact of consequentiality in willingness to accept: evidence from a choice experiment with land managers," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, December.
    34. Montgomery, W. David, 1972. "Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 395-418, December.
    35. Nguyen, Chi & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Hanley, Nick & Schilizzi, Steven & Iftekhar, Sayed, 2022. "Spatial Coordination Incentives for landscape-scale environmental management: A systematic review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    36. Tyllianakis, Emmanouil & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Ziv, Guy & Chapman, Pippa J. & Holden, Joseph & Cardwell, Michael & Fyfe, Duncan, 2023. "A window into land managers’ preferences for new forms of agri-environmental schemes: Evidence from a post-Brexit analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    37. John M. Crespi & Tina L. Saitone & Richard J. Sexton, 2012. "Competition in U.S. Farm Product Markets: Do Long-Run Incentives Trump Short-Run Market Power?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 34(4), pages 669-695.
    38. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    39. P.J. Dawson & J. Lingard, 1982. "Management bias and returns to scale in a Cobb-Douglas production function for agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 9(1), pages 7-24.
    40. Søren Olsen, 2009. "Choosing Between Internet and Mail Survey Modes for Choice Experiment Surveys Considering Non-Market Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(4), pages 591-610, December.
    41. Wiktor L. Adamowicz & Klaus Glenk & Jürgen Meyerhoff, 2014. "Choice modelling research in environmental and resource economics," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 27, pages 661-674, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    42. Rose, John M. & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A. & Collins, Andrew T., 2008. "Designing efficient stated choice experiments in the presence of reference alternatives," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 395-406, May.
    43. Slonim, Robert & Wang, Carmen & Garbarino, Ellen & Merrett, Danielle, 2013. "Opting-in: Participation bias in economic experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 43-70.
    44. Beatriz Velázquez & Bruno Buffaria, 2017. "About farmers’ bargaining power within the new CAP," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, December.
    45. Mamine, Fateh & Fares, M'hand & Minviel, Jean Joseph, 2020. "Contract Design for Adoption of Agrienvironmental Practices: A Meta-analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    46. Spicer, E. Anne & Swaffield, Simon & Moore, Kevin, 2021. "Agricultural land use management responses to a cap and trade regime for water quality in Lake Taupo catchment, New Zealand," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    47. Malte Welling & Ewa Zawojska & Julian Sagebiel, 2022. "Information, Consequentiality and Credibility in Stated Preference Surveys: A Choice Experiment on Climate Adaptation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 82(1), pages 257-283, May.
    48. Jing Zhang & Wiktor L. Adamowicz, 2011. "Unraveling the Choice Format Effect: A Context-Dependent Random Utility Model," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(4), pages 730-743.
    49. Hausman, Jerry & McFadden, Daniel, 1984. "Specification Tests for the Multinomial Logit Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1219-1240, September.
    50. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    51. Yacob Abrehe Zereyesus & Allen M. Featherstone & Michael R. Langemeier, 2021. "Are Kansas farms profit maximizers? A stochastic additive error approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(1), pages 37-50, January.
    52. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    53. Jeffrey M. Peterson & Craig M. Smith & John C. Leatherman & Nathan P. Hendricks & John A. Fox, 2015. "Transaction Costs in Payment for Environmental Service Contracts," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(1), pages 219-238.
    54. Matthews, Yvonne & Scarpa, Riccardo & Marsh, Dan, 2017. "Stability of Willingness-to-Pay for Coastal Management: A Choice Experiment Across Three Time Periods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 64-73.
    55. Stavins Robert N., 1995. "Transaction Costs and Tradeable Permits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 133-148, September.
    56. Kenyon, Wendy, 2007. "Evaluating flood risk management options in Scotland: A participant-led multi-criteria approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 70-81, October.
    57. Ronald C. Griffin & Daniel W. Bromley, 1982. "Agricultural Runoff as a Nonpoint Externality: A Theoretical Development," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(3), pages 547-552.
    58. Cai, Hongbin & Chen, Yuyu & Gong, Qing, 2016. "Polluting thy neighbor: Unintended consequences of China׳s pollution reduction mandates," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 86-104.
    59. Meredith Fowlie & Nicholas Muller, 2019. "Market-Based Emissions Regulation When Damages Vary across Sources: What Are the Gains from Differentiation?," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(3), pages 593-632.
    60. Loomes, Graham & Starmer, Chris & Sugden, Robert, 1991. "Observing Violations of Transitivity by Experimental Methods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 425-439, March.
    61. Garrod, Guy & Ruto, Eric & Willis, Ken & Powe, Neil, 2012. "Heterogeneity of preferences for the benefits of Environmental Stewardship: A latent-class approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 104-111.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Anastasio J. Villanueva & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & Macario Rodríguez-Entrena, 2025. "Impact of consequentiality in willingness to accept: evidence from a choice experiment with land managers," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, December.
    2. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    3. Christoph Schulze & Katarzyna Zagórska & Kati Häfner & Olimpia Markiewicz & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Bettina Matzdorf, 2024. "Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 44-83, February.
    4. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    5. Bougherara, Douadia & Lapierre, Margaux & Préget, Raphaële & Sauquet, Alexandre, 2021. "Do farmers prefer increasing, decreasing, or stable payments in Agri-environmental schemes?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    6. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Farmers’ preferences over alternative AECS designs. Do the ecological conditions influence the willingness to accept result-based contracts?," 97th Annual Conference, March 27-29, 2023, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 334508, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    7. Lapierre, Margaux & Le Velly, Gwenolé & Bougherara, Douadia & Préget, Raphaële & Sauquet, Alexandre, 2023. "Designing agri-environmental schemes to cope with uncertainty," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    8. Tzemi, Domna & Leppänen, Jussi & Autto, Hilja & Haltia, Emmi, 2025. "Finnish forest owners' willingness to participate in result-based carbon offset schemes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    9. Daniel Leppert, 2023. "“No fences make bad neighbors” but markets make better ones: cap-and-trade reduces cross-border SO2 in a natural experiment," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 25(3), pages 407-433, July.
    10. David Throsby & Anita Zednik & Jorge E. Araña, 2021. "Public preferences for heritage conservation strategies: a choice modelling approach," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 45(3), pages 333-358, September.
    11. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    12. Fanny Le Gloux & Carole Ropars-Collet & Alice Issanchou & Pierre Dupraz, 2025. "Payments for environmental services with ecological thresholds: farmers’ preferences for a sponsorship bonus," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 68(9), pages 2042-2069, July.
    13. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    14. Zemo, Kahsay Haile & Termansen, Mette, 2018. "Farmers’ willingness to participate in collective biogas investment: A discrete choice experiment study," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 87-101.
    15. Dan Pan, 2016. "The Design of Policy Instruments towards Sustainable Livestock Production in China: An Application of the Choice Experiment Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.
    16. Chèze, Benoît & David, Maia & Martinet, Vincent, 2020. "Understanding farmers' reluctance to reduce pesticide use: A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    17. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Tomasz Gajderowicz & Marek Giergiczny & Gabriela Grotkowska & Urszula Sztandar-Sztanderska, 2020. "Choosing the Future: Economic Preferences for Higher Education Using Discrete Choice Experiment Method," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 61(4), pages 510-539, June.
    18. Jan Vanstockem & Liesbet Vranken & Brent Bleys & Ben Somers & Martin Hermy, 2018. "Do Looks Matter? A Case Study on Extensive Green Roofs Using Discrete Choice Experiments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, January.
    19. Stefania Troiano & Matteo Carzedda & Francesco Marangon, 2023. "Better richer than environmentally friendly? Describing preferences toward and factors affecting precision agriculture adoption in Italy," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    20. Brent, Daniel A. & Gangadharan, Lata & Leroux, Anke D. & Raschky, Paul A., 2022. "Reducing bias in preference elicitation for environmental public goods," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(02), January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:aes026:397877. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aesukea.html .

    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.