IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae14/183069.html

Modelling the Participation Decision in Agri-Environmental Schemes

Author

Listed:
  • Murphy, Geraldine
  • O’Donoghue, Cathal
  • Hynes, Stephen
  • Murphy, Eithne

Abstract

Understanding what influences farmers’ decisions to participate in a voluntary agri-environmental scheme(AES) is essential for gauging scheme success. The Rural Environment Protection Scheme (REPS) was a voluntary AES that was available to all Irish farmers from 1994 to 2009. This paper models the participation decision of Irish farmers in REPS using a 15-year panel dataset. The approach taken is novel: actual values for gross outputs, direct costs and working hours are compared to simulated counterfactual values using a conditional logit framework. Model results show that Irish farmers behave rationally by maximising utility from both consumption and leisure but that their preferences differ by region and over time. In addition, the participation functions of viable and non-viable farmers are dissimilar in a number of ways. Policy makers may therefore need to target both groups of farmers using separate schemes in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Murphy, Geraldine & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & Murphy, Eithne, 2014. "Modelling the Participation Decision in Agri-Environmental Schemes," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183069, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae14:183069
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.183069
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/183069/files/O__39Donoghue-Modelling_the_participation_decision_in_agri-environmental_schemes-473_a.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.183069?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joyce Willock & Ian J. Deary & Gareth Edwards‐Jones & Gavin J. Gibson & Murray J. McGregor & Alistair Sutherland & J. Barry Dent & Oliver Morgan & Robert Grieve, 1999. "The Role of Attitudes and Objectives in Farmer Decision Making: Business and Environmentally‐Oriented Behaviour in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 286-303, May.
    2. Andrew Moxey & Ben White & Adam Ozanne, 1999. "Efficient Contract Design for Agri‐Environment Policy," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 187-202, May.
    3. Edi Defrancesco & Paola Gatto & Ford Runge & Samuele Trestini, 2008. "Factors Affecting Farmers’ Participation in Agri‐environmental Measures: A Northern Italian Perspective," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 114-131, February.
    4. Stephen Hynes & Eoghan Garvey, 2009. "Modelling Farmers’ Participation in an Agri‐environmental Scheme using Panel Data: An Application to the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Ireland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 546-562, September.
    5. Ruben N. Lubowski & Michael J. Roberts, 2005. "How Cost-Effective Are Land Retirement Auctions? Estimating the Difference between Payments and Willingness to Accept in the Conservation Reserve Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1239-1247.
    6. Jeremy G. Weber & Nigel Key, 2012. "How much Do Decoupled Payments Affect Production? An Instrumental Variable Approach with Panel Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 52-66.
    7. Blundell, Richard & Macurdy, Thomas, 1999. "Labor supply: A review of alternative approaches," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 27, pages 1559-1695, Elsevier.
    8. Maria Espinosa‐Goded & Jesús Barreiro‐Hurlé & Eric Ruto, 2010. "What Do Farmers Want From Agri‐Environmental Scheme Design? A Choice Experiment Approach," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 259-273, June.
    9. Becker, Gary S, 1993. "Nobel Lecture: The Economic Way of Looking at Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 385-409, June.
    10. Ferraro, Paul J., 2008. "Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 810-821, May.
    11. Ayal Kimhi, 2004. "Family Composition and Off-Farm Participation Decisions in Israeli Farm Households," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 502-512.
    12. John Creedy & Guyonne Kalb, 2005. "Discrete Hours Labour Supply Modelling: Specification, Estimation and Simulation," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 697-734, December.
    13. Hung-Hao Chang & Richard Boisvert, 2009. "Are farmers' decisions to work off the farm related to their decisions to participate in the conservation reserve program?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(1), pages 71-85.
    14. Shan Ma & Scott M. Swinton & Frank Lupi & Christina Jolejole-Foreman, 2012. "Farmers’ Willingness to Participate in Payment-for-Environmental-Services Programmes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(3), pages 604-626, September.
    15. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639.
    16. 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.
    17. Scott Steele, 2010. "An Organisational Discussion of Incomplete Contracting and Transaction Costs in Conservation Contracts," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 163-174, February.
    18. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, January.
    19. J. A. Finn & F. Bartolini & D. Bourke & I. Kurz & D. Viaggi, 2009. "Ex post environmental evaluation of agri-environment schemes using experts' judgements and multicriteria analysis," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(5), pages 717-737.
    20. Hisham El-Osta & Ashok Mishra & Mary Ahearn, 2004. "Labor Supply by Farm Operators Under “Decoupled” Farm Program Payments," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 367-385, August.
    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. Murphy, Geraldine & Meredith, David, 2015. "A typology of cattle farmers in Ireland: An overview of data, method and indicators," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212518, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Sergei Schaub & Jaboury Ghazoul & Robert Huber & Wei Zhang & Adelaide Sander & Charles Rees & Simanti Banerjee & Robert Finger, 2023. "The role of behavioural factors and opportunity costs in farmers' participation in voluntary agri‐environmental schemes: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 617-660, September.
    3. 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.
    4. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    5. Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Glenk, Klaus & Rodriguez-Entrena, M., 2016. "Serial non-participation and ecosystem services providers’ preferences towards incentive-based schemes," 90th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2016, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 236348, Agricultural Economics Society.
    6. Zhu, Lanlan & Zhang, Chunman & Cai, Yinying, 2018. "Varieties of agri-environmental schemes in China: A quantitative assessment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 505-517.
    7. Barr, Rhona F. & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Investigating fishers' preferences for the design of marine Payments for Environmental Services schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 91-103.
    8. Novikova, Anastasija & Rocchi, Lucia & Vitunskienė, Vlada, 2017. "Assessing the benefit of the agroecosystem services: Lithuanian preferences using a latent class approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 277-286.
    9. Unay-Gailhard, İlkay & Bojnec, Štefan, 2015. "Farm size and participation in agri-environmental measures: Farm-level evidence from Slovenia," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 46, pages 273-282.
    10. Matteo Olivieri & Maria Andreoli & Daniele Vergamini & Fabio Bartolini, 2021. "Innovative Contract Solutions for the Provision of Agri-Environmental Climatic Public Goods: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-22, June.
    11. Greiner, Romy, 2015. "Motivations and attitudes influence farmers' willingness to participate in biodiversity conservation contracts," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 154-165.
    12. Rolf Aaberge & Ugo Colombino, 2014. "Labour Supply Models," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: Handbook of Microsimulation Modelling, volume 127, pages 167-221, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    13. Campus, Daniela, 2014. "Evaluating agri-environmental schemes. The case of Tuscany," 2014 Third Congress, June 25-27, 2014, Alghero, Italy 172969, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    14. Cranford, Matthew & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Credit-Based Payments for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 503-520.
    15. Daniele Pacifico, 2013. "On the role of unobserved preference heterogeneity in discrete choice models of labour supply," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 929-963, October.
    16. Nicole Bosch & Miriam Gielen & Egbert Jongen & Mauro Mastrogiacomo (DNB & voorheen CPB), 2013. "A structural analysis of labour supply elasticities in the Netherlands," CPB Discussion Paper 235, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    17. Fabian Klebl & Peter H. Feindt & Annette Piorr, 2024. "Farmers’ behavioural determinants of on-farm biodiversity management in Europe: a systematic review," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(2), pages 831-861, June.
    18. Jeffrey Gillespie & Ashok Mishra, 2011. "Off‐farm employment and reasons for entering farming as determinants of production enterprise selection in US agriculture," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(3), pages 411-428, July.
    19. Nicole Bosch & Miriam Gielen & Egbert Jongen & Mauro Mastrogiacomo (DNB & voorheen CPB), 2013. "A structural analysis of labour supply elasticities in the Netherlands," CPB Discussion Paper 235.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    20. Nunez Godoy, Cristina C. & Pienaar, Elizabeth F. & Branch, Lyn C., 2022. "Willingness of private landowners to participate in forest conservation in the Chaco region of Argentina," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C33 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics

    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:eaae14:183069. 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.