IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-05234900.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Small steps in the right direction: Preferences of small-scale farmers for sustainable cattle systems in Guaviare, Colombian Amazon

Author

Listed:
  • Catalina Posada-Borrero

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier)

  • Driss Ezzine-De-Blas

    (UPR Forêts et Sociétés - Forêts et Sociétés - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement, Cirad-ES - Département Environnements et Sociétés - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement, Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement)

  • Emmanuelle Lavaine

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier)

  • Sébastien Roussel

    (CEE-M - Centre d'Economie de l'Environnement - Montpellier - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement - Institut Agro Montpellier - Institut Agro - Institut national d'enseignement supérieur pour l'agriculture, l'alimentation et l'environnement - UM - Université de Montpellier)

Abstract

This paper investigates the preferences of smallholder farmers residing in the agricultural frontier of the Colombia Amazon's Forest, specifically in the department of Guaviare, regarding interventions aimed at promoting the adoption of sustainable land-use systems. We focus on the transition from extensive livestock systems to sustainable livestock systems and agroforestry systems. The adoption of silvopastoral systems presents a significant opportunity for sustainable development, offering land-saving advantages that can be leveraged by programs to encourage other sustainable value chains, such as timber in agroforestry systems. Through a discrete choice experiment, we examine farmer preferences concerning land allocation, cash bonuses for permanence, and technical assistance. Additionally, we assess how socioeconomic factors influence farmers' decision-making in participating in such programs. Our findings indicate that while farmers exhibit a preference for allocating land to silvopastoral systems over agroforestry, they also show considerable interest in interventions involving a small proportion of timber in agroforestry systems. Furthermore, our analysis reveals that permanence bonuses tied to individual effort can enhance participation, while collective goals may hinder it.

Suggested Citation

  • Catalina Posada-Borrero & Driss Ezzine-De-Blas & Emmanuelle Lavaine & Sébastien Roussel, 2025. "Small steps in the right direction: Preferences of small-scale farmers for sustainable cattle systems in Guaviare, Colombian Amazon," Post-Print hal-05234900, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05234900
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108744
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-05234900v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-05234900v1/document
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108744?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. Carriazo, Fernando & Labarta, Ricardo & Escobedo, Francisco J., 2020. "Incentivizing sustainable rangeland practices and policies in Colombia’s Orinoco region," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    2. Anne-Charlotte Vaissière & Léa Tardieu & Fabien Quétier & Sébastien Roussel, 2018. "Preferences for biodiversity offset contracts on arable land: a choice experiment study with farmers," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 45(4), pages 553-582.
    3. Vorlaufer, Tobias & Falk, Thomas & Dufhues, Thomas & Kirk, Michael, 2017. "Payments for ecosystem services and agricultural intensification: Evidence from a choice experiment on deforestation in Zambia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 95-105.
    4. Wang, Mei & Rieger, Marc Oliver & Hens, Thorsten, 2016. "How time preferences differ: Evidence from 53 countries," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 115-135.
    5. Krister P. Andersson & Nathan J. Cook & Tara Grillos & Maria Claudia Lopez & Carl F. Salk & Glenn D. Wright & Esther Mwangi, 2018. "Experimental evidence on payments for forest commons conservation," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(3), pages 128-135, March.
    6. Rasch, Sebastian & Wünscher, Tobias & Casasola, Francisco & Ibrahim, Muhammad & Storm, Hugo, 2021. "Permanence of PES and the role of social context in the Regional Integrated Silvo-pastoral Ecosystem Management Project in Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    7. Chèze, Benoît & David, Maia & Martinet, Vincent, 2020. "Understanding farmers' reluctance to reduce pesticide use: A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    8. Ladenburg, Jacob & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2014. "Augmenting short Cheap Talk scripts with a repeated Opt-Out Reminder in Choice Experiment surveys," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 39-63.
    9. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    10. Susan Clayton & Sandor Czellar & Sonya Nartova-Bochaver & Jeffrey C. Skibins & Gabby Salazar & Yu-Chi Tseng & Boris Irkhin & Fredy S. Monge-Rodriguez, 2021. "Cross-Cultural Validation of A Revised Environmental Identity Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-12, February.
    11. Nong, Yixin & Yin, Changbin & Yi, Xiaoyan & Ren, Jing & Chien, Hsiaoping, 2021. "Smallholder farmer preferences for diversifying farming with cover crops of sustainable farm management: A discrete choice experiment in Northwest China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    12. Balderas Torres, Arturo & MacMillan, Douglas C. & Skutsch, Margaret & Lovett, Jon C., 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services and rural development: Landowners' preferences and potential participation in western Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 72-81.
    13. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    14. Mamine, Fateh & Fares, M'hand & Minviel, Jean Joseph, 2020. "Contract Design for Adoption of Agrienvironmental Practices: A Meta-analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    15. Sven Wunder & Jan Börner & Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sarah Feder & Stefano Pagiola, 2020. "Payments for Environmental Services: Past Performance and Pending Potentials," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 12(1), pages 209-234, October.
    16. Bhattacharjee, Arnab & Aravena, Claudia & Castillo, Natalia & Ehrlich, Marco & Taou, Nadia & Wagner, Thomas, 2022. "Agroforestry Programs in the Colombian Amazon: Selection, Treatment and Exposure Effects on Deforestation," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 537, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    17. 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.
    18. Hess, Stephane & Palma, David, 2019. "Apollo: A flexible, powerful and customisable freeware package for choice model estimation and application," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-1.
    19. Anne-Charlotte Vaissière & Léa Tardieu & Fabien Quétier & Sébastien Roussel, 2018. "Preferences for biodiversity offset contracts on arable land: a choice experiment study with farmers," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 45(4), pages 553-582.
    20. Bauch, Simone C. & Sills, Erin O. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K., 2014. "Have We Managed to Integrate Conservation and Development? ICDP Impacts in the Brazilian Amazon," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 135-148.
    21. Ezzine de Blas, Driss & Ruiz Pérez, Manuel & Sayer, Jeffrey A. & Lescuyer, Guillaume & Nasi, Robert & Karsenty, Alain, 2009. "External Influences on and Conditions for Community Logging Management in Cameroon," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 445-456, February.
    22. Hensher, David A. & Rose, John & Bertoia, Tony, 2007. "The implications on willingness to pay of a stochastic treatment of attribute processing in stated choice studies," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 73-89, March.
    23. Rodríguez-de-Francisco, Jean Carlo & del Cairo, Carlos & Ortiz-Gallego, Daniel & Velez-Triana, Juan Sebastian & Vergara-Gutiérrez, Tomás & Hein, Jonas, 2021. "Post-conflict transition and REDD+ in Colombia: Challenges to reducing deforestation in the Amazon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    24. James Murphy & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "Is Cheap Talk Effective at Eliminating Hypothetical Bias in a Provision Point Mechanism?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 327-343, March.
    25. Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio & Sagebiel, Julian & Rommel, Jens & Olschewski, Roland, 2021. "Types of collective action problems and farmers’ willingness to accept agri-environmental schemes in Switzerland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    26. John Rose & Michiel Bliemer, 2013. "Sample size requirements for stated choice experiments," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 1021-1041, September.
    27. Esteve Corberan & Sébastien Costedoat & Driss Ezzine de Blas & Gert van Hecken, 2020. "Troubled encounters: Payments for ecosystem services in Chiapas, Mexico," Post-Print hal-05180811, HAL.
    28. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    29. Tacconi, Luca, 2012. "Redefining payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 29-36.
    30. Haile, Kaleab K. & Tirivayi, Nyasha & Tesfaye, Wondimagegn, 2019. "Farmers’ willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services on agricultural land: The case of climate-smart agroforestry in Ethiopia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    31. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    32. Damien Arvor & Marion Daugeard & Isabelle Tritsch & Neli Aparecida Mello-Thery & Hervé Thery & Vincent Dubreuil, 2018. "Combining socioeconomic development with environmental governance in the Brazilian Amazon: the Mato Grosso agricultural frontier at a tipping point," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 1-22, February.
    33. Faver Álvarez & Fernando Casanoves & Juan Carlos Suárez, 2021. "Influence of scattered trees in grazing areas on soil properties in the Piedmont region of the Colombian Amazon," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-19, December.
    34. Esteve Corbera & Sébastien Costedoat & Driss Ezzine‐de‐Blas & Gert Van Hecken, 2020. "Troubled Encounters: Payments for Ecosystem Services in Chiapas, Mexico," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 51(1), pages 167-195, January.
    35. Calle, Alicia, 2020. "Can short-term payments for ecosystem services deliver long-term tree cover change?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    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. Christoph Schulze & Katarzyna Zagórska & Kati Häfner & Olimpia Markiewicz & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Bettina Matzdorf, 2024. "Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 44-83, February.
    2. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    3. Iván Pérez-Rubio & Daniel Flores & Christian Vargas & Francisco Jiménez & Iker Etxano, 2021. "To What Extent Are Cattle Ranching Landholders Willing to Restore Ecosystem Services? Constructing a Micro-Scale PES Scheme in Southern Costa Rica," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-24, July.
    4. Lapierre, Margaux & Le Velly, Gwenolé & Bougherara, Douadia & Préget, Raphaële & Sauquet, Alexandre, 2023. "Designing agri-environmental schemes to cope with uncertainty," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    5. Bougherara, Douadia & Lapierre, Margaux & Préget, Raphaële & Sauquet, Alexandre, 2021. "Do farmers prefer increasing, decreasing, or stable payments in Agri-environmental schemes?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    6. Jacobson, Michael & Shr, Yau-Huo & Dalemans, Floris & Magaju, Christine & Ciannella, Rodrigo, 2018. "Using a choice experiment approach to assess production tradeoffs for developing the croton value chain in Kenya," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 76-85.
    7. Maldonado, Jorge H. & Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio & Henao-Henao, Juan P. & Bruner, Aaron, 2019. "Does exclusion matter in conservation agreements? A case of mangrove users in the Ecuadorian coast using participatory choice experiments," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Mamine, Fateh & Fares, M'hand & Minviel, Jean Joseph, 2020. "Contract Design for Adoption of Agrienvironmental Practices: A Meta-analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    9. Romy Greiner, 2023. "Examining Participation in and Supply of Private Land for Voluntary Conservation in Australia’s Tropical Savannas: A Discrete-Continuous Choice Experiment," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, June.
    10. Nthambi, Mary & Wätzold, Frank & Markova-Nenova, Nonka, 2018. "Quantifying benefit losses from poor governance of climate change adaptation projects: A discrete choice experiment with farmers in Kenya," MPRA Paper 94678, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Zabala, José A. & Martínez-Paz, José M. & Alcon, Francisco, 2021. "Integrated valuation of semiarid Mediterranean agroecosystem services and disservices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Nthambi, Mary & Markova-Nenova, Nonka & Wätzold, Frank, 2021. "Quantifying Loss of Benefits from Poor Governance of Climate Change Adaptation Projects: A Discrete Choice Experiment with Farmers in Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    13. Sponagel, Christian & Angenendt, Elisabeth & Piepho, Hans-Peter & Bahrs, Enno, 2021. "Farmers’ preferences for nature conservation compensation measures with a focus on eco-accounts according to the German Nature Conservation Act," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    14. Geussens, Katrien & Van Den Broeck, Goedele & Vanderhaegen, Koen & Verbist, Bruno & Maertens, Miet, "undated". "Farmers' perspectives on payments for watershed services in Uganda," Working Papers 276470, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    15. Bénédicte Rulleau, 2024. "Household preferences for cyber-attack resilient water distribution networks: A latent class analysis of a discrete choice experiment in France," Post-Print hal-04157111, HAL.
    16. Marie Asma Ben-Othmen & Mariia Ostapchuk, 2023. "How diverse are farmers’ preferences for large-scale grassland ecological restoration? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 341-375, December.
    17. Geussens, K. & Van den Broeck, G. & Vanderhaegen, K. & Verbist, B. & Maertens, M., 2019. "Farmers’ perspectives on payments for ecosystem services in Uganda," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 316-327.
    18. Pauline Laille & Marianne Lefebvre & Masha Maslianskaia-Pautrel, 2020. "Individual preferences regarding pesticide-free management of green-spaces: a discret choice experiment with French citizens," Working Papers hal-02867639, HAL.
    19. Admasu, Wubante Fetene & Van Passel, Steven & Nyssen, Jan & Minale, Amare Sewnet & Tsegaye, Enyew Adgo, 2021. "Eliciting farmers’ preferences and willingness to pay for land use attributes in Northwest Ethiopia: A discrete choice experiment study," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    20. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services

    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:hal:journl:hal-05234900. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.