IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/inrasl/264955.html

On the direct, indirect and induced impacts of public policies: The European biofuel case

Author

Listed:
  • Gohin, Alexandre

Abstract

This paper deals with the controversial indirect land use changes of the European biodiesel policy. Two studies sponsored by the European Commission finds significant, but contrasted, land use effects for the different vegetable oils used for biodiesel production. The first study uses an aggregate computable general equilibrium model capturing direct, indirect and induced effects. The second recent study uses a biotechnical partial equilibrium model offering a detailed representation of the indirect effects occurring through the livestock sectors. We develop an original economic emulator to understand the diverging key results of these studies and test their sensitivity. We find that the direct and indirect effects on vegetable oil markets explain most of the differences. We also find that indirect effects on the livestock sector and the induced effects do not significantly influence the biodiesel results. However results are critically sensitive to crop yield responses that are considerably underestimated in both studies. The cropland displacement due to the biodiesel policy computed by the recent study is overestimated by a factor of 5.

Suggested Citation

  • Gohin, Alexandre, "undated". "On the direct, indirect and induced impacts of public policies: The European biofuel case," Working Papers 264955, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:inrasl:264955
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.264955
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/264955/files/wp17-09.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/264955/files/wp17-09.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.264955?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. Berck, Peter & Helfand, Gloria, 1990. "Mathematical Appendcies for: Reconciling the Von Liebig and Differentiable Crop Production Functions," CUDARE Working Papers 198468, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    2. Thomas W. Hertel & Kyle Stiegert & Harry Vroomen, 1996. "Nitrogen-Land Substitution in Corn Production: A Reconciliation of Aggregate and Firm-Level Evidence," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(1), pages 30-40.
    3. Alexandre Gohin, 2013. "Le biodiesel émet-il beaucoup de gaz à effet de serre ?," Revue française d'économie, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 0(3), pages 165-212.
    4. Alla A. Golub & Thomas W. Hertel, 2012. "Modeling Land-Use Change Impacts Of Biofuels In The Gtap-Bio Framework," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(03), pages 1-30.
    5. Govinda R. Timilsina & John C. Beghin & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe & Simon Mevel, 2012. "The impacts of biofuels targets on land‐use change and food supply: A global CGE assessment," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 43(3), pages 315-332, May.
    6. Farzad Taheripour & Thomas W. Hertel & Wallace E. Tyner, 2011. "Implications of biofuels mandates for the global livestock industry: a computable general equilibrium analysis," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(3), pages 325-342, May.
    7. Gohin, Alexandre, 2005. "The specification of price and income elasticities in computable general equilibrium models: An application of latent separability," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 905-925, September.
    8. Bruce A. Babcock, 2015. "Extensive and Intensive Agricultural Supply Response," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 333-348, October.
    9. Jayson Beckman & R. Keeney & W. Tyner, 2011. "Feed demands and coproduct substitution in the biofuel era," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 1-18, Winter.
    10. Dong Hee Suh & Charles B. Moss, 2016. "Dynamic interfeed substitution: implications for incorporating ethanol byproducts into feedlot rations," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(20), pages 1893-1901, April.
    11. Kenneth H. Mathews, Jr. & Michael J. McConnell, 2012. "The Market for U.S. Livestock Feed Proteins," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 34(4), pages 555-569.
    12. Peter Berck & Gloria Helfand, 1990. "Reconciling the von Liebig and Differentiable Crop Production Functions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(4), pages 985-996.
    13. Alain Carpentier & Elodie Letort, 2012. "Accounting for Heterogeneity in Multicrop Micro-Econometric Models: Implications for Variable Input Demand Modeling," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 209-224.
    14. Sato, Kazuo, 1969. "Micro and macro constant-elasticity-of-substitution production functions in a multifirm industry," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 438-453, December.
    15. Sherman Robinson & Hans Meijl & Dirk Willenbockel & Hugo Valin & Shinichiro Fujimori & Toshihiko Masui & Ron Sands & Marshall Wise & Katherine Calvin & Petr Havlik & Daniel Mason d'Croz & Andrzej Tabe, 2014. "Comparing supply-side specifications in models of global agriculture and the food system," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 21-35, January.
    16. Thomas W. Hertel & Uris Lantz C. Baldos & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 2016. "Predicting Long-Term Food Demand, Cropland Use, and Prices," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 417-441, October.
    17. Alexandre Gohin, 2005. "The specification of price and income elasticities in computable general equilibrium models : an application of latent separability," Post-Print hal-01931546, HAL.
    18. H. S. Houthakker, 1955. "The Pareto Distribution and the Cobb-Douglas Production Function in Activity Analysis," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 23(1), pages 27-31.
    19. Alison Burrell & Maria Blanco & Stephan Hubertus Gay & Martin Henseler & Aikaterini Kavallari & Robert M'barek & Ignacio Perez & Axel Tonini, 2010. "Impacts of the EU Biofuel Target on Agricultural Markets and Land Use - A Comparative Modelling Assessment," JRC Research Reports JRC58484, Joint Research Centre.
    20. Alain Carpentier & Elodie Letort, 2014. "Multicrop Production Models with Multinomial Logit Acreage Shares," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 59(4), pages 537-559, December.
    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. Alexandre Gohin, 2017. "On the direct, indirect and induced impacts of public policies: The European biofuel case," Working Papers SMART 17-09, INRAE UMR SMART.
    2. Alexandre Gohin, 2020. "The Land Use Impacts of the EU Biodiesel Policy: Assessing the Direct, Indirect and Induced Effects," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(2), pages 305-329, June.
    3. CARPENTIER, Alain & GOHIN, Alexandre & SCKOKAI, Paolo & THOMAS, Alban, 2015. "Economic modelling of agricultural production: past advances and new challenges," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 96(01), March.
    4. Cornelis Gardebroek & Jeffrey J. Reimer & Lieneke Baller, 2017. "The Impact of Biofuel Policies on Crop Acreages in Germany and France," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 839-860, September.
    5. U. Martin Persson, 2015. "The impact of biofuel demand on agricultural commodity prices: a systematic review," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(5), pages 410-428, September.
    6. Hochman, Gal & Zilberman, David, 2021. "Optimal environmental taxation in response to an environmentally-unfriendly political challenger," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    7. Ramsey, A. Ford & Sonoda, Tadashi & Ko, Minkyong, 2021. "Aggregation and Threshold Models of Intersectoral Labor Migration: Evidence from the United States and Japan," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315110, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Alexandre Gohin, 2013. "The land use changes of European biodiesel: sensitivity to crop yield evolutions," Working Papers SMART 13-13, INRAE UMR SMART.
    9. George Philippidis & Heleen Bartelings & John Helming & Robert M’barek & Edward Smeets & Hans Van Meijl, 2018. "The Good, the Bad and the Uncertain: Bioenergy Use in the European Union," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-19, October.
    10. Obafèmi P. Koutchadé & Alain Carpentier & Fabienne Femenia, 2021. "Modeling Corners, Kinks, and Jumps in Crop Acreage Choices: Impacts of the EU Support to Protein Crops," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(4), pages 1502-1524, August.
    11. Alexandre Gohin & GianCarlo Moschini, 2006. "Evaluating the Market and Welfare Impacts of Agricultural Policies in Developed Countries: Comparison of Partial and General Equilibrium Measures," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 28(2), pages 195-211.
    12. Weng, Yuwei & Chang, Shiyan & Cai, Wenjia & Wang, Can, 2019. "Exploring the impacts of biofuel expansion on land use change and food security based on a land explicit CGE model: A case study of China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 514-525.
    13. Alain Carpentier & Robert D. Weaver, 1996. "Assessment of producers' attitude toward risk and information using panel data : the example of pesticide use in the French crop sector," Post-Print hal-01931607, HAL.
    14. Narayanan, Badri G. & Hertel, Thomas W. & Horridge, J. Mark, 2010. "Disaggregated data and trade policy analysis: The value of linking partial and general equilibrium models," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 755-766, May.
    15. Eli Feinerman & Darrell J. Bosch & James W. Pease, 2004. "Manure Applications and Nutrient Standards," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(1), pages 14-25, February.
    16. Çağatay, Selim & Taşdoğan, Celal & Özeş, Reyhan, . "Analysing the impact of targeted bio-ethanol blending ratio in Turkey," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 6(2).
    17. Femenia, Fabienne & Letort, Elodie, 2014. "Economic incentives to the adoption of low input cropping systems: the case of multi-resistant wheat cultivars in France," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182743, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Berck, Peter & Lipow, Jonathan, 1994. "Real and ideal water rights: the prospects for water-rights reform in Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank," CUDARE Working Papers 43743, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    19. Ole Boysen, 2019. "When does specification or aggregation across consumers matter for economic impact analysis models? An investigation into demand systems," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 137-172, January.
    20. Alain Carpentier & Alexandre Gohin, 2015. "On the economic theory of crop rotations: value of the crop rotation effects and implications on acreage choice modeling," Working Papers SMART 15-04, INRAE UMR SMART.

    More about this item

    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:inrasl:264955. 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/inrapfr.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.