IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/36361.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Applying a bio-economic optimal control model to charcoal production: The case of slash and burn agriculture in Mexico
[Aplicando un modelo bio-económico de control óptimo a la producción de carbón vegetal: el caso de las comunidades agrícolas de roza-tumba-quema en México]

Author

Listed:
  • Arrocha, Fernando
  • Villena, Mauricio G.

Abstract

This paper analyzes the relationship between rural poverty and forest land management in the context of charcoal production under slash and burn. An optimal control model determines how a representative household makes decisions on the allocation of forest areas to work and use them to affect the renewable resource base on which it depends. The proposed optimal control model for charcoal production is built upon the agricultural model of slash and burn by Pascual and Barbier (2007). This theoretical model is calibrated with data from the community of Chunkanán, Campeche, Mexico. The simulation and comparison of the traditional forestry slash and burn management with the Forest Management Program for the Exploitation of Timber Resources (FMETR), proposed by the regulatory authority as a policy of use and conservation of forest resources, showed that the former is indeed sustainable from an ecological point of view and efficient from an economic point of view, implying that households allocate an optimal amount of work and forest biomass.

Suggested Citation

  • Arrocha, Fernando & Villena, Mauricio G., 2011. "Applying a bio-economic optimal control model to charcoal production: The case of slash and burn agriculture in Mexico [Aplicando un modelo bio-económico de control óptimo a la producción de carbón," MPRA Paper 36361, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 Feb 2012.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:36361
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/36361/1/MPRA_paper_36361.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/36375/1/MPRA_paper_36375.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lopez, Ramon, 1997. "Environmental externalities in traditional agriculture and the impact of trade liberalization: the case of Ghana," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 17-39, June.
    2. Unai Pascual & Edward B. Barbier, 2007. "On Price Liberalization, Poverty, and Shifting Cultivation: An Example from Mexico," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(2), pages 192-216.
    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. Unai Pascual & Roberto Martínez-Espiñeira, 2009. "The effect of environmental change and price policies on livelihoods in tropical agroforestry systems," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(3), pages 433-446.
    2. Yoshito Takasaki & Oliver T. Coomes & Christian Abizaid & Stéphanie Brisson, 2014. "An Efficient Nonmarket Institution under Imperfect Markets: Labor Sharing for Tropical Forest Clearing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 96(3), pages 711-732.
    3. Pascual, Unai & Martinez-Espineira, Roberto, 2006. "Poverty and environmental degradation under trade liberalization: searching for second-best policy options," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 6(12), pages 1-24.
    4. Yoshito Takasaki, 2011. "Economic models of shifting cultivation: a review," Tsukuba Economics Working Papers 2011-006, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Tsukuba.
    5. Copeland, Brian R., 2005. "Policy Endogeneity and the Effects of Trade on the Environment," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 1-15, April.
    6. Thomas Vendryes, 2014. "Peasants Against Private Property Rights: A Review Of The Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 971-995, December.
    7. Hakimi, Abdelaziz & Hamdi, Helmi, 2016. "Trade liberalization, FDI inflows, environmental quality and economic growth: A comparative analysis between Tunisia and Morocco," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 1445-1456.
    8. Demeke, Bayou, 2004. "Is Globalization Bad For The Environment? International Trade And Land Degradation In Developing Countries:The Case Of Small Open Economy," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20376, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    9. Godoy, Ricardo & Reyes-García, Victoria & Vadez, Vincent & Leonard, William R. & Tanner, Susan & Huanca, Toms & Wilkie, David, 2009. "The relation between forest clearance and household income among native Amazonians: Results from the Tsimane' Amazonian panel study, Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1864-1871, April.
    10. Andersen, Lykke E. & Groom, Ben & Killick, Evan & Ledezma, Juan Carlos & Palmer, Charles & Weinhold, Diana, 2017. "Modelling Land Use, Deforestation, and Policy: A Hybrid Optimisation-Heterogeneous Agent Model with Application to the Bolivian Amazon," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 76-90.
    11. Gardner Brown, 2000. "Renewable Natural Resource Management and Use Without Markets," Working Papers 0025, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
    12. Owusu, Victor & Gunning, Jan Willem & Burger, Kees, 2007. "Do Tenure Differences Influence the Improvement of Quality of Rented Land? Empirical Evidence from Rural Ghana," 106th Seminar, October 25-27, 2007, Montpellier, France 7933, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. López, Ramón & Schiff, Maurice, 2013. "Interactive dynamics between natural and man-made assets: The impact of external shocks," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 1-15.
    14. Wurtenberger, Laura & Koellner, Thomas & Binder, Claudia R., 2006. "Virtual land use and agricultural trade: Estimating environmental and socio-economic impacts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 679-697, June.
    15. Karp, Larry, 2004. "Property Rights, Mobile Capital, and Comparative Advantage," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt41h0b5v5, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    16. Peter Park & Edward Barbier & Joanne Burgess, 1998. "The Economics of Forest Land Use in Temperate and Tropical Areas," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 473-487, April.
    17. Lichtenberg, Erik, 2006. ""A note on soil depth, failing markets and agricultural pricing": Comment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 236-243, October.
    18. Rodriguez, Luis Carlos & Pascual, Unai, 2004. "Land clearance and social capital in mountain agro-ecosystems: the case of Opuntia scrubland in Ayacucho, Peru," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 243-252, June.
    19. Moon, Wanki, 2011. "Is agriculture compatible with free trade?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 13-24.
    20. Berazneva, Julia & Lee, David R. & Place, Frank & Jakubson, George, 2018. "Allocation and Valuation of Smallholder Maize Residues in Western Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 172-182.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Forest Management; Rural Poverty; Charcoal Production; Rural Households;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products

    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:pra:mprapa:36361. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.