IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wop/wisaes/398.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Induced Innovation and Land Degradation in Developing Country Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • IAN COXHEAD

Abstract

With few exceptions, induced innovation theories give little consideration either to the role of distortions as determinants of the factor biases of innovations, or to the influence of technical progress – with or without distortions – on the sectoral structure of production. This analysis identifies demand for innovations as a function of a specific policy setting which both conditions and is conditioned by the structure of production. In this context, when some sectors contribute more than others to environmental externalities, private and social optima in the allocation of research resources may diverge. In some circumstances it may be optimal to use research budget allocations as second‐best substitutes for Pigouvian taxes.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Coxhead, 1996. "Induced Innovation and Land Degradation in Developing Country Agriculture," Wisconsin-Madison Agricultural and Applied Economics Staff Papers 398, Wisconsin-Madison Agricultural and Applied Economics Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:wop:wisaes:398
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.aae.wisc.edu/www/pub/sps/stpap398.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harry R. Clarke, 1992. "The Supply Of Non‐Degraded Agricultural Land," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 36(1), pages 31-56, April.
    2. Julian M. Alston & Will J. Martin, 1995. "Reversal of Fortune: Immiserizing Technical Change in Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(2), pages 251-259.
    3. Dasgupta, Partha & Maler, Karl-Goran, 1995. "Poverty, institutions, and the environmental resource-base," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 39, pages 2371-2463, Elsevier.
    4. Kenneth E. McConnell, 1983. "An Economic Model of Soil Conservation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 65(1), pages 83-89.
    5. Vousden,Neil, 1990. "The Economics of Trade Protection," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521346696.
    6. Carlson, Gerald A. & Zilberman, David & Miranowski, John, 1993. "Agricultural and Resource Economics," Staff General Research Papers Archive 11104, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Murphy, John A. & Furtan, W. Hartley & Schmitz, Andrew, 1993. "The gains from agricultural research under distorted trade," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 161-172, June.
    8. Mussa, Michael, 1979. "The two-sector model in terms of its dual : A geometric exposition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 513-526, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kim, Kwansoo & Barham, Bradford L. & Coxhead, Ian, 2001. "Measuring soil quality dynamics: A role for economists, and implications for economic analysis," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 13-26, June.
    2. Poudel, D. D. & Midmore, D. J. & Hargrove, W. L., 1998. "An analysis of commercial vegetable farms in relation to sustainability in the uplands of Southeast Asia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 107-128, September.
    3. Shively, Gerald & Zelek, Charles, 2002. "Linking Economic Policy and Environmental Outcomes at a Watershed Scale," Philippine Journal of Development PJD 2002 Vol. XXIX No. 1-, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    4. Coxhead, Ian & Shively, Gerald & Shuai, Xiaobing, 2002. "Development policies, resource constraints, and agricultural expansion on the Philippine land frontier," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 341-363, May.
    5. Mullen, John D., 2001. "An Economic Persective On Land Degradation Issues," Research Reports 27999, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries Research Economists.
    6. Bayou Demeke & Ian Coxhead, 2005. "The Effect of National Policies and Labor Market on Land Use Decisions in Developing Countries: An Application of Maximum Simulated Likelihood to System of Censored Acreages with Panel Data," Others 0503007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Martin, Fernando Santos & Noordwijk, Meine van, 2011. "Is native timber tree intercropping an economically feasible alternative for smallholder farmers in the Philippines?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(2), pages 1-16.
    8. Coxhead, Ian, 2000. "Consequences of a Food Security Strategy for Economic Welfare, Income Distribution and Land Degradation: The Philippine Case," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 111-128, January.
    9. Gerald E. Shively, 2001. "Agricultural Change, Rural Labor Markets, and Forest Clearing: An Illustrative Case from the Philippines," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(2), pages 268-284.
    10. Shively, Gerald E., 1999. "Prices and Tree Planting on Hillside Farms in Palawan," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 937-949, June.

    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. Brausmann, Alexandra & Bretschger, Lucas, 2018. "Economic development on a finite planet with stochastic soil degradation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-19.
    2. Shiferaw, Bekele & Holden, Stein T., 2000. "Policy instruments for sustainable land management: the case of highland smallholders in Ethiopia," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 217-232, April.
    3. Ekbom, Anders & Brown, Gardner M. & Sterner, Thomas, 2009. "Muddy Waters: Soil Erosion and Downstream Externalities," Working Papers in Economics 341, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    4. Gilles Lafforgue & Walid Oueslati, 2007. "Optimal soil management and environmental policy," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 17(3), pages 1-10.
    5. Gardner Brown, 2000. "Renewable Natural Resource Management and Use Without Markets," Working Papers 0025, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
    6. Tokgoz, Simla, 2004. "Can Eu Enlargement Lead To "Immiserizing Growth"? An Empirical Investigation," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20100, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Amrita Chatterjee & Arpita Ghose, 2016. "A dynamic economic model of soil conservation and drought tolerance involving genetically modified crops," Journal of Social and Economic Development, Springer;Institute for Social and Economic Change, vol. 18(1), pages 40-66, October.
    8. Ian A. COXHEAD, 1995. "Economic Modeling Of Land Degradation In Developing Countries," Staff Papers 385, University of Wisconsin Madison, AAE, revised May 1996.
    9. Nkonya, Ephraim M. & Barkley, Andrew P. & Hamilton, Stephen F. & Bernardo, Daniel J., 1999. "Environmental And Economic Impacts Of Soil Erosion And Fertility Mining In Northern Tanzania," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21623, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Amrita Chatterjee & Arpita Ghose, 2015. "A Dynamic Economic Model of Soil Conservation Involving Genetically Modified Crop," Working Papers id:6623, eSocialSciences.
    14. Lapar, Ma. Lucila A. & Pandey, Sushil, 1999. "Adoption of soil conservation: the case of the Philippine uplands," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 241-256, December.
    15. Darrell L. Hueth, 1995. "The Use of Subsidies to Achieve Efficient Resource Allocation in Upland Watersheds," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 39158, Inter-American Development Bank.
    16. Hueth, Darrell L., 1995. "The Use of Subsidies to Achieve Efficient Resource Allocation in Upland Watersheds," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 6301, Inter-American Development Bank.
    17. Lichtenberg, Erik, 2002. "Agriculture and the environment," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 23, pages 1249-1313, Elsevier.
    18. Gardner M. Brown, 2000. "Renewable Natural Resource Management and Use without Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(4), pages 875-914, December.
    19. Johan F.M. Swinnen & Harry de Gorter, 1998. "Endogenous Commodity Policies and the Social Benefits from Public Research Expenditures," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 107-115.
    20. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:17:y:2007:i:3:p:1-10 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini & Chisholm, Anthony H., 2001. "Determination of yield and erosion damage functions using subjectively elicited data: application to smallholder tea in Sri Lanka," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(2), pages 1-15.

    More about this item

    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:wop:wisaes:398. 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dauwius.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.