IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae14/182807.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Land use strategies for sustainable rural development under revenue uncertainty: A case from Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Djanibekov, Utkur
  • Villamor, Grace B.

Abstract

We investigated the economic attractiveness of different land uses and possible payments for carbon in rubber monoculture and agroforest, and biodiversity in agroforest under revenue uncertainty in Jambi, Indonesia. A multi-period programming with Monte Carlo simulation and Brownian motion were used. Findings showed that farm incomes would substantially vary, and to mitigate uncertainty the farmland would be diversified. Further increase in carbon prices would result in enhancing the area of rubber monoculture and would lead to possible trade-off in agrobiodiversity. When the payments for ecosystem services are targeted for agroforest then its returns would increase and reduce farm income variability.

Suggested Citation

  • Djanibekov, Utkur & Villamor, Grace B., 2014. "Land use strategies for sustainable rural development under revenue uncertainty: A case from Indonesia," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182807, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae14:182807
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.182807
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/182807/files/Djanibekov-Land_use_strategies_for_sustainable_rural_development_under_uncertainty-518_a.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.182807?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. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474.
    2. Vatn, Arild, 2010. "An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1245-1252, April.
    3. Benjamin, Dwayne, 1992. "Household Composition, Labor Markets, and Labor Demand: Testing for Separation in Agricultural Household Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 287-322, March.
    4. Pannell, David J. & Llewellyn, Rick S. & Corbeels, Marc, 2013. "The farm-level economics of conservation agriculture for resource-poor farmers," Working Papers 166526, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    5. Phoebe Koundouri & Céline Nauges & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2006. "Technology Adoption under Production Uncertainty: Theory and Application to Irrigation Technology," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(3), pages 657-670.
    6. Kallis, Giorgos & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Zografos, Christos, 2013. "To value or not to value? That is not the question," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 97-105.
    7. David K. Lambert & Bruce A. McCarl, 1985. "Risk Modeling Using Direct Solution of Nonlinear Approximations of the Utility Function," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 67(4), pages 846-852.
    8. Affholder, François & Jourdain, Damien & Quang, Dang Dinh & Tuong, To Phuc & Morize, Marion & Ricome, Aymeric, 2010. "Constraints to farmers' adoption of direct-seeding mulch-based cropping systems: A farm scale modeling approach applied to the mountainous slopes of Vietnam," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 51-62, January.
    9. Pagiola, Stefano & Arcenas, Agustin & Platais, Gunars, 2005. "Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-253, February.
    10. Stefan Baumgärtner & Martin F. Quaas, 2010. "Managing increasing environmental risks through agrobiodiversity and agrienvironmental policies," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(5), pages 483-496, September.
    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. Djanibekov, Utkur & Villamor, Grace, 2015. "Spillover effects of market-based instruments under revenue uncertainty in Jambi Province, Indonesia," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211578, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Sauer, Johannes & Zilberman, David, 2009. "Innovation Behaviour At Farm Level – Selection And Identification," 83rd Annual Conference, March 30 - April 1, 2009, Dublin, Ireland 51073, Agricultural Economics Society.
    3. Veronesi, Marcella & Reutemann, Tim & Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2015. "Designing REDD+ schemes when forest users are not forest landowners: Evidence from a survey-based experiment in Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 46-57.
    4. Norgaard, Richard B., 2010. "Ecosystem services: From eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1219-1227, April.
    5. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    6. Spangenberg, Joachim H. & von Haaren, Christina & Settele, Josef, 2014. "The ecosystem service cascade: Further developing the metaphor. Integrating societal processes to accommodate social processes and planning, and the case of bioenergy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 22-32.
    7. Linda Steinhübel & Johannes Wegmann & Oliver Mußhoff, 2020. "Digging deep and running dry—the adoption of borewell technology in the face of climate change and urbanization," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(5), pages 685-706, September.
    8. Djiby Racine Thiam & Ariel Dinar & Hebert Ntuli, 2021. "Promotion of residential water conservation measures in South Africa: the role of water-saving equipment," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(1), pages 173-210, January.
    9. Pham, Thu Thuy & Loft, Lasse & Bennett, Karen & Phuong, Vu Tan & Dung, Le Ngoc & Brunner, Jake, 2015. "Monitoring and evaluation of Payment for Forest Environmental Services in Vietnam: From myth to reality," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 220-229.
    10. Yin, Runsheng & Zhao, Minjuan, 2012. "Ecological restoration programs and payments for ecosystem services as integrated biophysical and socioeconomic processes—China's experience as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 56-65.
    11. Koundouri, Phoebe & Nauges, Céline & Tzouvelekas, Vangelis, 2009. "The Effect of Production Uncertainty and Information Dissemination of the Diffusion of Irrigation Technologies," TSE Working Papers 09-032, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    12. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    13. Kathleen McAfee, 2012. "The Contradictory Logic of Global Ecosystem Services Markets," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 105-131, January.
    14. Li, Haoyang & Zhao, Jinhua, 2018. "What Drives (No) Adoption of New Irrigation Technologies: A Structural Dynamic Estimation Approach," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274474, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Authelet, Manon & Subervie, Julie & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Asquith, Nigel & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2021. "Economic, pro-social and pro-environmental factors influencing participation in an incentive-based conservation program in Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    16. Muñoz Escobar, Marcela & Hollaender, Robert & Pineda Weffer, Camilo, 2013. "Institutional durability of payments for watershed ecosystem services: Lessons from two case studies from Colombia and Germany," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 46-53.
    17. Sauer, Johannes & Zilberman, David D., 2009. "Innovation behaviour at micro level - selection and identification," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt6t49r0fh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    18. Rawlins, Maurice A. & Westby, Leon, 2013. "Community participation in payment for ecosystem services design and implementation: An example from Trinidad," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 117-121.
    19. Hayes, Tanya & Murtinho, Felipe, 2018. "Communal governance, equity and payment for ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 123-136.
    20. Zhen Liu & Arne Henningsen, 2016. "The effects of China's Sloping Land Conversion Program on agricultural households," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 295-307, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Land Economics/Use; Risk and Uncertainty;

    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:eaae14:182807. 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/eaaeeea.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.