IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaa107/6625.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Mixed Geographically Weighted Approach to Decoupling and Rural Development in the EU-15

Author

Listed:
  • Pecci, Francesco
  • Sassi, Maria

Abstract

The CAP reform and the recent EC communication aimed at preparing its Health Check emphasise the need for interventions locally based where agricultural policy integrates with a broader policy for rural areas growth. In this context, the paper investigates the possible different sets policy indicators affecting agricultural productivity at the regional level considering spatial heterogeneity by means of a Mixed Geographically Weighted Regression approach. The analysis is based on a set of policy sensitive indicators selected according to the key component of the CAP reform and referred to a sample of 164 EU-15 regions at NUTS2 level. The methodology adopted, new for the empirical literature on the topic, allows for a more accurate understanding of spatial relationship of the agricultural and socio-economic factors affecting agricultural productivity at the local level providing useful information for policy making.

Suggested Citation

  • Pecci, Francesco & Sassi, Maria, 2008. "A Mixed Geographically Weighted Approach to Decoupling and Rural Development in the EU-15," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6625, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa107:6625
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/6625
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mary Clare Ahearn & Jet Yee & Penni Korb, 2005. "Effects of Differing Farm Policies on Farm Structure and Dynamics," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1182-1189.
    2. Teresa Serra & Barry K. Goodwin & Allen M. Featherstone, 2005. "Agricultural Policy Reform and Off-farm Labour Decisions," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 271-285.
    3. Michael Lechner, 2002. "Program Heterogeneity And Propensity Score Matching: An Application To The Evaluation Of Active Labor Market Policies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(2), pages 205-220, May.
    4. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    5. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra E. Todd, 1997. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 605-654.
    6. Ashok K. Mishra & Barry K. Goodwin, 1997. "Farm Income Variability and the Supply of Off-Farm Labor," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(3), pages 880-887.
    7. Shaik, Saleem & Helmers, Glenn A., 2006. "An Examination Of Farm Program Payments On Farm Economic Structure," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21215, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Lori Lynch & Wayne Gray & Jacqueline Geoghegan, 2007. "Are Farmland Preservation Program Easement Restrictions Capitalized into Farmland Prices? What Can a Propensity Score Matching Analysis Tell Us?," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(3), pages 502-509.
    9. Thilo Glebe & Klaus Salhofer, 2007. "EU agri-environmental programs and the "restaurant table effect"," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(2-3), pages 211-218, September.
    10. Heckman, James J. & Lalonde, Robert J. & Smith, Jeffrey A., 1999. "The economics and econometrics of active labor market programs," Handbook of Labor Economics,in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 31, pages 1865-2097 Elsevier.
    11. Nigel Key & Michael J. Roberts, 2006. "Government Payments and Farm Business Survival," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(2), pages 382-392.
    12. Barbara Sianesi, 2001. "Propensity score matching," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2001 12, Stata Users Group, revised 23 Aug 2001.
    13. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra Todd, 1998. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(2), pages 261-294.
    14. Howard D. Leathers, 1992. "The Market for Land and the Impact of Farm Programs on Farm Numbers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(2), pages 291-298.
    15. Marco Caliendo & Sabine Kopeinig, 2008. "Some Practical Guidance For The Implementation Of Propensity Score Matching," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 31-72, February.
    16. C. S. Kim & G. Schluter & G. Schaible & A. Mishra & C. Hallahan, 2005. "A Decomposed Negative Binomial Model of Structural Change: A Theoretical and Empirical Application to U.S. Agriculture," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(2-3), pages 161-176, June.
    17. Joe Dewbre, 2006. "The Impact of Coupled and Decoupled Government Subsidies on Off-Farm Labor Participation of U.S. Farm Operators," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(2), pages 393-408.
    18. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 1998. "Causal Effects in Non-Experimental Studies: Re-Evaluating the Evaluation of Training Programs," NBER Working Papers 6586, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Nigel Key & Ruben N. Lubowski & Michael J. Roberts, 2005. "Farm-Level Production Effects from Participation in Government Commodity Programs: Did the 1996 Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act Make a Difference?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1211-1219.
    20. Sascha O. Becker & Andrea Ichino, 2002. "Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 2(4), pages 358-377, November.
    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. repec:kap:iaecre:v:16:y:2010:i:1:p:96-108 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Kang, Dong-Woo & Kim, Mi-young & Cho, Deok-ho & Lee, Seong-woo, 2010. "The Effects of Urban Development Pressure on Agricultural Land Price: Application of a Mixed GWR Model," Journal of Rural Development/Nongchon-Gyeongje, Korea Rural Economic Institute, vol. 33(4), October.
    3. Maria Sassi, 2010. "OLS and GWR Approaches to Agricultural Convergence in the EU-15," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 16(1), pages 96-108, February.

    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:eaa107:6625. 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/eaaeeea.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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.