IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

On-Site Costs and Benefits of Soil Conservation Among Hillside Farmers in El Salvador

Listed author(s):
  • Boris Bravo

    (Office of International Affairs and Department Of Agriculture and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut Storrs,CT,USA.)

  • Horacio Cocchi

    (Office of International Affairs, University of Connecticut, Storrs,CT,USA.)

Registered author(s):

    This study analyses the relationships between farm income, adoption of conservation technologies and output diversification among PAES participants by comparing their performance at two points in time, 2002 and 2005, and against non-participants (control group) in 2005. An endogeneity test confirms that conservation adoption and diversification are endogenous. Therefore, the diversification and adoption equations are estimated first and the predicted values of both endogenous variables are used in a second step as additional explanatory variables in the farm income equation where the latter is estimated using the Tobit technique. The Tobit results are then used to generate the net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR) of the soil conservation and agroforestry component of PAES between 1998 and 2005. Crop diversification and soil conservation practices exhibit a strong positive association with the length of farmers’ involvement with PAES and their participation in social organizations. Soil conservation practices and crop diversification, measured by an entropy index, significantly increase farm income, which highlights the strategic role of diversification in fighting rural poverty. The positive association between conservation practices and income contrasts with the effects of conservation structures, which is negative but non-significant. A substantial body of literature increasingly recognizes that structures are expensive to build and maintain whereas they add little to the land productivity in the short run. Such drawbacks may clearly affect the profitability of these conservation technologies.Then we compare cost and benefit figures over the life-span of PAES (1998-2005) to compute the IRR and NPV. Average income gains per family per year amount to $280, while the NPV is $13,674,100 at a 12% discount rate with an IRR of 48.45%. These indicators clearly reveal that the soil conservation and agroforestry component of PAES has been highly profitable, which is in line with similar evaluations of natural resource management programs in Central America and elsewhere. Finally, the estimates of NPV and IRR are robust, according to diverse scenarios generated using bootstrapping and sensitivity analysis.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Inter-American Development Bank, Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE) in its series OVE Working Papers with number 0407.

    in new window

    Length: 44 pages
    Date of creation: Nov 2007
    Handle: RePEc:idb:ovewps:0407
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    1300 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20577

    Phone: 202-623-1000
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:idb:ovewps:0407. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Monica Bazan)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.