IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Behavioural Drivers of Stocking Rate Decisions in Less Favoured Areas


  • McCormack, Michele
  • O’Donoghue, Cathal
  • Loughrey, Jason


In this paper we use a natural experiment to investigate the behavioural response of Irish Cattle farmers to historical policy incentives. In particular we are interested in the period 2001 – 2005 when Less Favoured Area payments were decoupled from production and other subsidy payments available to all farmers remained coupled. The decoupling of the Less Favoured Areas payment provides an exogenous source of variation that gives us unique opportunity for policy evaluation. Researchers rarely observe the effects of a policy change on those affected and those not affected since in almost all cases a policy change affects all. We adopt an ordinal Utility maximization consumer choice framework where individuals make decisions in relation to consumption and leisure. Under our model of utility maximization the expected market gross margin is positively associated with livestock intensity. We identify a non-linear relationship between direct coupled payments and livestock intensity which suggests that high payments incentivise farmers towards extensification. Using a Difference in Difference with propensity score matching we find that there were substantial differences in the behavioural responses of both groups. Farms where payments remained fully coupled adapted their stocking rate decisions in a way that reflects both learning and rationality more significantly than farms where part of their payment was decoupled.

Suggested Citation

  • McCormack, Michele & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Loughrey, Jason, 2015. "Behavioural Drivers of Stocking Rate Decisions in Less Favoured Areas," 150th Seminar, October 22-23, 2015, Edinburgh, Scotland 212644, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa150:212644
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.212644

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    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

    1. Hausman, Jerry A, 1985. "The Econometrics of Nonlinear Budget Sets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(6), pages 1255-1282, November.
    2. Raj Chetty & John N. Friedman & Tore Olsen & Luigi Pistaferri, 2011. "Adjustment Costs, Firm Responses, and Micro vs. Macro Labor Supply Elasticities: Evidence from Danish Tax Records," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(2), pages 749-804.
    3. Burtless, Gary & Hausman, Jerry A, 1978. "The Effect of Taxation on Labor Supply: Evaluating the Gary Negative Income Tax Experiments," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 86(6), pages 1103-1130, December.
    4. Emmanuel Saez, 2010. "Do Taxpayers Bunch at Kink Points?," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 180-212, August.
    5. Henrik J. Kleven & Mazhar Waseem, 2013. "Using Notches to Uncover Optimization Frictions and Structural Elasticities: Theory and Evidence from Pakistan," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(2), pages 669-723.
    6. Moffitt, Robert, 1990. "The Econometrics of Kinked Budget Constraints," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(2), pages 119-139, Spring.
    7. Breen, James P. & Hennessy, Thia C. & Thorne, Fiona S., 2005. "The effect of decoupling on the decision to produce: An Irish case study," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 129-144, April.
    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. Brown, Kristine M., 2013. "The link between pensions and retirement timing: Lessons from California teachers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 1-14.
    2. Kumar, Anil & Liang, Che-Yuan, 2020. "Estimating taxable income responses with elasticity heterogeneity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    3. Wang, Xiangrui & Lee, Jukwan & Yan, Jia & Thompson, Gary D., 2018. "Testing the behavior of rationally inattentive consumers in a residential water market," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 344-359.
    4. Wang, Xiangrui & Lee, Jukwan & Yan, Jia & Thompson, Gary D., 2017. "Modeling Rational But Inattentive Consumer’s Residential Water Demand," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258555, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Bastani, Spencer & Selin, Håkan, 2014. "Bunching and non-bunching at kink points of the Swedish tax schedule," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 36-49.
    6. Stuart Adam & James Browne & David Phillips & Barra Roantree, 2021. "Frictions and taxpayer responses: evidence from bunching at personal tax thresholds," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 28(3), pages 612-653, June.
    7. Kowalski, Amanda E., 2015. "Estimating the tradeoff between risk protection and moral hazard with a nonlinear budget set model of health insurance," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 122-135.
    8. Bertanha, Marinho & McCallum, Andrew H. & Seegert, Nathan, 2023. "Better bunching, nicer notching," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 237(2).
    9. Koichiro Ito, 2014. "Do Consumers Respond to Marginal or Average Price? Evidence from Nonlinear Electricity Pricing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(2), pages 537-563, February.
    10. Neumann, M., 2017. "Earnings responses to social security contributions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 55-73.
    11. Andreas R. Kostøl & Andreas S. Myhre, 2021. "Labor Supply Responses to Learning the Tax and Benefit Schedule," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(11), pages 3733-3766, November.
    12. Homonoff, Tatiana & Spreen, Thomas Luke & St. Clair, Travis, 2020. "Balance sheet insolvency and contribution revenue in public charities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    13. Vincent Dekker & Karsten Schweikert, 2021. "A Comparison of Different Data-driven Procedures to Determine the Bunching Window," Public Finance Review, , vol. 49(2), pages 262-293, March.
    14. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Lequien, Matthieu & Stantcheva, Stefanie, 2017. "Tax simplicity and heterogeneous learning," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86613, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Annette Alstadsæter & Wojciech Kopczuk & Kjetil Telle, 2019. "Social networks and tax avoidance: evidence from a well-defined Norwegian tax shelter," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 26(6), pages 1291-1328, December.
    16. Emmanuel Saez, 2010. "Do Taxpayers Bunch at Kink Points?," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 180-212, August.
    17. Dhammika Dharmapala, 2016. "Estimating the Compliance Costs of Securities Regulation: A Bunching Analysis of Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404(b)," CESifo Working Paper Series 6180, CESifo.
    18. Anil Kumar, 2012. "Nonparametric estimation of the impact of taxes on female labor supply," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(3), pages 415-439, April.
    19. Li Liu & Benjamin Lockwood, 2015. "VAT Notches," CESifo Working Paper Series 5371, CESifo.
    20. R. Lardeux, 2018. "Who Understands The French Income Tax? Bunching Where Tax Liabilities Start," Documents de Travail de l'Insee - INSEE Working Papers g2018-04, Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques.

    More about this item


    Agricultural and Food Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:eaa150:212644. 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: .

    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.