IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uwauwp/108416.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economics of controlling a spreading environmental weed

Author

Listed:
  • Chalak, Morteza
  • Pannell, David J.

Abstract

Weeds can cause significant problems to natural ecosystems. Although there have been numerous studies on the economics of weed control, relatively few of these studies have focused on natural ecosystems. This paper addresses this gap in the literature by assessing the cost-effectiveness of a comprehensive range of control strategies for blackberry (Rubus anglocandicans) in natural environments in Australia. We developed a stochastic dynamic simulation model and a deterministic dynamic optimisation model. The stochastic model calculates the expected net present value (NPV) of a range of control strategies, including any combination of treatment options. The optimisation model identifies the treatment combination that maximises NPV. Both models represent the costs and efficacies of control options over 25 years. The results indicate that using rust (Phragmidium violaceum) as a biological control agent only marginally increases NPV and excluding rust does not affect the optimal choice of other control options. The results also show for a wide range of parameter values that a strategy which combines the herbicide grazon (Triclopyre and picloram) and mowing is optimal. If chemical efficacy decreases by 20 percent it becomes optimal to include grazing blackberry by goats in the control strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Chalak, Morteza & Pannell, David J., 2011. "Economics of controlling a spreading environmental weed," Working Papers 108416, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:uwauwp:108416
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.108416
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/108416/files/WP110014.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.108416?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. Mark Morrison & Jeff Bennett, 2004. "Valuing New South Wales rivers for use in benefit transfer," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(4), pages 591-611, December.
    2. Pannell, David J. & Stewart, Vanessa & Bennett, Anne & Monjardino, Marta & Schmidt, Carmel & Powles, Stephen B., 2004. "RIM: a bioeconomic model for integrated weed management of Lolium rigidum in Western Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 305-325, March.
    3. Odom, Doreen I. S. & Cacho, Oscar J. & Sinden, J. A. & Griffith, Garry R., 2003. "Policies for the management of weeds in natural ecosystems: the case of scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius, L.) in an Australian national park," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 119-135, February.
    4. C. Robert Taylor & Oscar R. Burt, 1984. "Near-Optimal Management Strategies for Controlling Wild Oats in Spring Wheat," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(1), pages 50-60.
    5. Bulte, Erwin H. & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 1999. "Metapopulation dynamics and stochastic bioeconomic modeling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 293-299, August.
    6. Higgins, Steven I. & Turpie, Jane K. & Costanza, Robert & Cowling, Richard M. & Le Maitre, Dave C. & Marais, Christo & Midgley, Guy F., 1997. "An ecological economic simulation model of mountain fynbos ecosystems: Dynamics, valuation and management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 155-169, 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. Zull, Andrew F. & Cacho, Oscar J. & Lawes, Roger A., 2009. "Optimising woody-weed control," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 47620, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Morteza Chalak & David J. Pannell, 2015. "Optimal Integrated Strategies to Control an Invasive Weed," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 63(3), pages 381-407, September.
    3. Chalak-Haghighi, Morteza & Ruijs, Arjan & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2009. "Biological control of invasive plant species: stochastic economic analysis," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 48153, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    4. Odom, Doreen I. S. & Cacho, Oscar J. & Sinden, J. A. & Griffith, Garry R., 2003. "Policies for the management of weeds in natural ecosystems: the case of scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius, L.) in an Australian national park," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 119-135, February.
    5. Chalak, Morteza & Pannell, David J., 2012. "Optimising control of an agricultural weed in sheep-production pastures," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 1-8.
    6. Born, Wanda & Rauschmayer, Felix & Bräuer, Ingo, 2004. "Economic evaluation of biological invasions: A survey," UFZ Discussion Papers 7/2004, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    7. Olson, Lars J., 2006. "The Economics of Terrestrial Invasive Species: A Review of the Literature," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 178-194, April.
    8. Bauer, Dana Marie & Swallow, Stephen K., 2013. "Conserving metapopulations in human-altered landscapes at the urban–rural fringe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 159-170.
    9. Timothy J. Lowe & Paul V. Preckel, 2004. "Decision Technologies for Agribusiness Problems: A Brief Review of Selected Literature and a Call for Research," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 201-208.
    10. Robert Johnston, 2007. "Choice experiments, site similarity and benefits transfer," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(3), pages 331-351, November.
    11. Kragt, Marit Ellen & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2011. "Using choice experiments to value catchment and estuary health in Tasmania with individual preference heterogeneity," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(2), pages 1-21.
    12. Jeff Bennett & Jeremy Cheesman & Russell Blamey & Marit Kragt, 2016. "Estimating the non-market benefits of environmental flows in the Hawkesbury-Nepean River," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 236-248, July.
    13. David J. Pannell, 1991. "Pests and pesticides, risk and risk aversion," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 5(4), pages 361-383, August.
    14. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2008. "Testing for differences in benefit transfer values between state and regional frameworks," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(2), pages 1-20.
    15. Sanchirico, James N. & Wilen, James E., 2000. "Dynamics of Spatial Exploitation: A Metapopulation Approach," Discussion Papers 10513, Resources for the Future.
    16. Smith, Martin D. & Sanchirico, James N. & Wilen, James E., 2009. "The economics of spatial-dynamic processes: Applications to renewable resources," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 104-121, January.
    17. Mitchell, Paul D., 2011. "Economic Assessment of the Benefits of Chloro-s-triazine Herbicides to U.S. Corn, Sorghum, and Sugarcane Producers," Staff Paper Series 564, University of Wisconsin, Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    18. Cacho, Oscar J. & Wise, Russell M. & Hester, Susan M. & Sinden, J.A., 2008. "Bioeconomic modeling for control of weeds in natural environments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 559-568, April.
    19. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John & Brouwer, Roy, 2009. "Public values for improved water security for domestic and environmental use," Research Reports 94818, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    20. Johnston, Robert J. & Duke, Joshua M., 2010. "Socioeconomic adjustments and choice experiment benefit function transfer: Evaluating the common wisdom," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 421-438, August.

    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:uwauwp:108416. 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/aruwaau.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.