IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/nceewp/280893.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Many Times Could You Replicate Polyface Farm? A Schematic Model of Ecosystem Services in Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Simpson, R. David

Abstract

There has been considerable recent interest in the idea that farms can produce both food and a variety of ecosystem services. One particularly intriguing notion is that farmers might find it in their own interest to adopt an “ecosystem services” approach to production in preference to a “conventional” approach. In the conventional approach farmers devote substantially all of their land directly to production and purchase a variety of fertilizers, pesticides, and other inputs. In contrast, if farmers preserve a substantial fraction of their land in a more-or-less “natural” condition, or restore it to such a state, the ecosystem services provided by preserved natural systems may obviate the purchase of many inputs. While private adoption of the ecosystem services approach would not result in the optimal provision of ecosystem services, given that some such services generate positive benefits on a broader scale than an individual farmer can appropriate, it is reasonable to regard the conversion of farms from a conventional to an ecosystem services approach to production as a step in the right direction toward more ecologically benign land use. In this paper I develop a simple and schematic model of land use in agriculture. I motivate the model by reference to Polyface Farm, a farm described in Michael Pollan’s 2006 bestseller The Omnivore’s Dilemma. Polyface Farm has adopted an ecosystem service approach: its owner restored more than fourth-fifths of the land he controls to a natural state. In contrast, his neighbors actively farm the great majority of their holdings. I develop a simple model that duplicates the stylized fact that farmers choose between very different production approaches. The model also predicts, however, that farmers who adopt an ecosystem services approach would reduce their production in the same proportion as they reduce the area of land they employ directly in production. This finding has an important implication for policy. While manipulation of agricultural prices or subsidies might induce some farmers to adopt an ecosystem services approach, such a strategy would be self-limiting. When one farmer adopts an ecosystem services approach in preference to the conventional approach she will reduce her output. Prices would rise in response, and the incentive for others to emulate her choice would be reduced.

Suggested Citation

  • Simpson, R. David, 2010. "How Many Times Could You Replicate Polyface Farm? A Schematic Model of Ecosystem Services in Agriculture," National Center for Environmental Economics-NCEE Working Papers 280893, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:nceewp:280893
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.280893
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/280893/files/NCEE2010-12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.280893?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. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    2. Robin Naidoo & Taylor H Ricketts, 2006. "Mapping the Economic Costs and Benefits of Conservation," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(11), pages 1-12, October.
    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. Li Yu & Yinchao Lyu & Chun Chen & Charles L. Choguill, 2021. "Environmental deterioration in rapid urbanisation: evidence from assessment of ecosystem service value in Wujiang, Suzhou," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 331-349, January.
    2. Pierre Mokondoko & Robert H Manson & Taylor H Ricketts & Daniel Geissert, 2018. "Spatial analysis of ecosystem service relationships to improve targeting of payments for hydrological services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, February.
    3. Wright, William C.C. & Eppink, Florian V. & Greenhalgh, Suzie, 2017. "Are ecosystem service studies presenting the right information for decision making?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 128-139.
    4. Pandeya, B. & Buytaert, W. & Zulkafli, Z. & Karpouzoglou, T. & Mao, F. & Hannah, D.M., 2016. "A comparative analysis of ecosystem services valuation approaches for application at the local scale and in data scarce regions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 250-259.
    5. Shanafelt, David W. & Serra-Diaz, Josep M. & Bocquého, Géraldine, 2023. "Measuring uncertainty in ecosystem service correlations as a function of sample size," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    6. García-Nieto, Ana P. & García-Llorente, Marina & Iniesta-Arandia, Irene & Martín-López, Berta, 2013. "Mapping forest ecosystem services: From providing units to beneficiaries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 126-138.
    7. Retallack, Matthew, 2021. "The intersection of economic demand for ecosystem services and public policy: A watershed case study exploring implications for social-ecological resilience," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    8. Andrew Balmford & Brendan Fisher & Rhys Green & Robin Naidoo & Bernardo Strassburg & R. Kerry Turner & Ana Rodrigues, 2011. "Bringing Ecosystem Services into the Real World: An Operational Framework for Assessing the Economic Consequences of Losing Wild Nature," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 161-175, February.
    9. John Lynham, 2012. "Ecomarkets For Conservation And Sustainable Development in the Coastal Zone," Working Papers 201218, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    10. Zahra Kalantari & Sara Khoshkar & Helena Falk & Vladimir Cvetkovic & Ulla Mörtberg, 2017. "Accessibility of Water-Related Cultural Ecosystem Services through Public Transport—A Model for Planning Support in the Stockholm Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-16, February.
    11. Ochoa, Vivian & Urbina-Cardona, Nicolás, 2017. "Tools for spatially modeling ecosystem services: Publication trends, conceptual reflections and future challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 155-169.
    12. Santiago Peredo Parada & Claudia Barrera Salas, 2023. "Multifunctional Plants: Ecosystem Services and Undervalued Knowledge of Biocultural Diversity in Rural Communities—Local Initiatives for Agroecological Transition in Chile," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Stephen Polasky, 2009. "Conservation economics: economic analysis of biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 10(1), pages 1-20, March.
    14. Cengiz Türe & Yiğit Türe, 2021. "A model for the sustainability assessment based on the human development index in districts of Megacity Istanbul (Turkey)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 3623-3637, March.
    15. Kuhn, Tinka K. & Oinonen, Soile & Trentlage, Jennifer & Riikonen, Simo & Vikström, Suvi & Burkhard, Benjamin, 2021. "Participatory systematic mapping as a tool to identify gaps in ecosystem services research: insights from a Baltic Sea case study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    16. Chenoweth, Jonathan & Anderson, Andrew R. & Kumar, Prashant & Hunt, W.F. & Chimbwandira, Sarah Jane & Moore, Trisha L.C., 2018. "The interrelationship of green infrastructure and natural capital," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 137-144.
    17. Worthington, Thomas A. & Worthington, Ian & Vaughan, Ian P. & Ormerod, Steve J. & Durance, Isabelle, 2020. "Testing the ecosystem service cascade framework for Atlantic salmon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    18. Bull, J.W. & Jobstvogt, N. & Böhnke-Henrichs, A. & Mascarenhas, A. & Sitas, N. & Baulcomb, C. & Lambini, C.K. & Rawlins, M. & Baral, H. & Zähringer, J. & Carter-Silk, E. & Balzan, M.V. & Kenter, J.O. , 2016. "Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats: A SWOT analysis of the ecosystem services framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 99-111.
    19. Georgios Karakatsanis & Nikos Mamassis, 2023. "Energy, Trophic Dynamics and Ecological Discounting," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-43, October.
    20. Zilio, Mariana I. & Alfonso, M. Belén & Ferrelli, Federico & Perillo, Gerardo M.E. & Piccolo, M. Cintia, 2017. "Ecosystem services provision, tourism and climate variability in shallow lakes: The case of La Salada, Buenos Aires, Argentina," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 208-217.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:nceewp:280893. 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/nepgvus.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.