IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/haaewp/308132.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

b. Development of supply curves for environmental compensation measures on farmland on the example of the Stuttgart Region in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Sponagel, Christian
  • Back, Hans
  • Angenendt, Elisabeth
  • Bahrs, Enno

Abstract

Impacts on nature and landscape in Germany must be compensated for in accordance with the Federal Nature Conservation Act. Farmers can participate by voluntarily applying appropriate measures on their land. We used a geodata-based model to analyse environmental compensation measures on arable land from an economic perspective on the example of the Stuttgart Region, a metropolitan area where construction activities and their compensation are huge, exemplary for many European metropolises. In order to estimate a possible realistic potential, the willingness to accept for compensation measures previously determined in a discrete choice experiment with farmers in the Stuttgart region was integrated into the model. The analysis compares the economic viability of current agricultural use with the income generated from the sale of so called ecopoints by supply curve. The results show wide variation in ecopoint potential in spatial terms. The implementation of compensation measures is not economically reasonable, depending on the legal security provided by a land register entry at a price of less than 1.00 € per ecopoint in the Stuttgart city district. In contrast, measures can be implemented economically and on a large scale in surrounding districts for less than 0.60 €, regardless of legal protection. The optimal type of compensation measure from an economic point of view depends on type and land is also important. The model and its results can provide important information for decision-makers in politics, landscape planning and nature conservation.

Suggested Citation

  • Sponagel, Christian & Back, Hans & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Bahrs, Enno, 2020. "b. Development of supply curves for environmental compensation measures on farmland on the example of the Stuttgart Region in Germany," Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department 308132, Harper Adams University, Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:haaewp:308132
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.308132
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/308132/files/Development%20of%20supply%20curves%202020_09%20upload.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.308132?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. Tietz, Andreas & Bathke, Manfred & Osterburg, Bernhard, 2012. "Art und Ausmaß der Inanspruchnahme landwirtschaftlicher Flächen für außerlandwirtschaftliche Zwecke und Ausgleichsmaßnahmen," Thünen Working Paper 137038, Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut (vTI), Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    2. Sullivan, S. & Hannis, M., 2015. "Nets and frames, losses and gains: Value struggles in engagements with biodiversity offsetting policy in England," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 162-173.
    3. Tietz, Andreas & Bathke, Manfred & Osterburg, Bernhard, 2012. "Art und Ausmaß der Inanspruchnahme landwirtschaftlicher Flächen für außerlandwirtschaftliche Zwecke und Ausgleichsmaßnahmen," Arbeitsberichte aus der vTI-Agrarökonomie 05/2012, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    4. Andrej Lange & Rosemarie Siebert & Tim Barkmann, 2015. "Sustainability in Land Management: An Analysis of Stakeholder Perceptions in Rural Northern Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-22, January.
    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. Sponagel, Christian & Back, Hans & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Bahrs, Enno, 2020. "b. Development of supply curves for environmental compensation measures on farmland on the example of the Stuttgart Region in Germany," Agri-Tech Economics Papers 308132, Harper Adams University, Land, Farm & Agribusiness Management Department.
    2. Sponagel, Christian & Bendel, Daniela & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Weber, Tobias Karl David & Gayler, Sebastian & Streck, Thilo & Bahrs, Enno, 2022. "Integrated assessment of regional approaches for biodiversity offsetting in urban-rural areas – A future based case study from Germany using arable land as an example," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    3. Hermanns, Till & Helming, Katharina & König, Hannes J. & Schmidt, Katharina & Li, Qirui & Faust, Heiko, 2017. "Sustainability impact assessment of peatland-use scenarios: Confronting land use supply with demand," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 365-376.
    4. Dereje Teklemariam & Hossein Azadi & Jan Nyssen & Mitiku Haile & Frank Witlox, 2016. "How Sustainable Is Transnational Farmland Acquisition in Ethiopia? Lessons Learned from the Benishangul-Gumuz Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-27, February.
    5. Bidaud, Cécile & Schreckenberg, Kate & Jones, Julia P.G., 2018. "The local costs of biodiversity offsets: Comparing standards, policy and practice," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 43-50.
    6. Amanda Sahrbacher & Jordan Hristov & Mark V. Brady, 2017. "A combined approach to assess the impacts of Ecological Focus Areas on regional structural development and agricultural land use," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(3), pages 111-144, December.
    7. Tim Barkmann & Rosemarie Siebert & Andrej Lange, 2017. "Land-use experts’ perception of regional climate change: an empirical analysis from the North German Plain," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 287-301, September.
    8. Vladislav Valentinov & Gabriela Vaceková, 2015. "Sustainability of Rural Nonprofit Organizations: Czech Republic and Beyond," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-17, July.
    9. Jian Peng & Minli Zong & Yi'na Hu & Yanxu Liu & Jiansheng Wu, 2015. "Assessing Landscape Ecological Risk in a Mining City: A Case Study in Liaoyuan City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-23, June.
    10. Benjamin Neimark & Sango Mahanty & Wolfram Dressler, 2016. "Mapping Value in a ‘Green’ Commodity Frontier: Revisiting Commodity Chain Analysis," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 47(2), pages 240-265, March.
    11. Piotr Bórawski & Marta Guth & Aneta Bełdycka-Bórawska & Krzysztof Józef Jankowski & Andrzej Parzonko & James W. Dunn, 2020. "Investments in Polish Agriculture: How Production Factors Shape Conditions for Environmental Protection?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-26, October.
    12. Jacob, Céline & Vaissiere, Anne-Charlotte & Bas, Adeline & Calvet, Coralie, 2016. "Investigating the inclusion of ecosystem services in biodiversity offsetting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PA), pages 92-102.
    13. Uchendu Eugene Chigbu & Michael Klaus & Wenjun Zhang & Laina Alexander, 2023. "Rural Land Management and Revitalization through a Locally Coordinated Integrated Master Plan—A Model from Germany to China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-22, September.
    14. Primmer, Eeva & Varumo, Liisa & Kotilainen, Juha M. & Raitanen, Elina & Kattainen, Matti & Pekkonen, Minna & Kuusela, Saija & Kullberg, Peter & Kangas, Johanna A.M. & Ollikainen, Markku, 2019. "Institutions for governing biodiversity offsetting: An analysis of rights and responsibilities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 776-784.
    15. Evangelia Apostolopoulou & Elisa Greco & William M Adams, 2019. "Biodiversity Offsetting and the Production of 'Equivalent Natures': A Marxist Critique," Post-Print halshs-02441026, HAL.
    16. Jianxiao Liu & Meilian Wang & Linchuan Yang, 2020. "Assessing Landscape Ecological Risk Induced by Land-Use/Cover Change in a County in China: A GIS- and Landscape-Metric-Based Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-18, October.
    17. Katherine Simpson & Frans P de Vries & Paul Armsworth & Nick Hanley, 2017. "Designing markets for biodiversity offsets: lessons from tradable pollution permits," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2017-04, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    18. Gelas Rubakula & Zhanqi Wang & Chao Wei, 2019. "Land Conflict Management through the Implementation of the National Land Policy in Tanzania: Evidence from Kigoma Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-12, November.
    19. Karalliyadda, S.M.C.B. & Kazunari, Tsuji & Fujimura, Miho, 2023. "Managing rain-fed uplands of cascaded tank village systems: What stakeholders really suggest?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    20. Oliver Taherzadeh & Peter Howley, 2018. "No net loss of what, for whom?: stakeholder perspectives to Biodiversity Offsetting in England," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 1807-1830, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Agricultural and Food Policy; Agricultural Finance;
    All these 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:haaewp:308132. 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/dlhauuk.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.