IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/gjagec/232344.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ermittlung der Teilnahmebereitschaft an Vertragsnaturschutzprogrammen und der dafür notwendigen Ausgleichszahlungen mit Hilfe eines Discrete-Choice-Experimentes

Author

Listed:
  • Breustedt, Gunnar
  • Schulz, Norbert
  • Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe

Abstract

Die Determinanten für die Teilnahmebereitschaft an Vertragsnaturschutzprogrammen in den beiden schleswig- holsteinischen Grünlandregionen Eiderstedt und Südtondern werden mit einem Discrete-Choice-Experiment ermittelt. Wie erwartet, wirken eine erhöhte Ausgleichszahlung positiv und höhere Auflagen negativ auf die Wahrscheinlichkeit, einen Vertrag zu wählen. Neben vertragsspezifischen werden eine Vielzahl betriebsindividueller Determinanten der Vertragswahl identifiziert. Betriebe, die bereits an Naturschutzprogrammen teilnehmen, wählen mit einer höheren Wahrscheinlichkeit einen Vertrag. Die aus den Determinanten bestimmte marginale Willingness to Accept zeigt, dass gerade Vertragseigenschaften, wie Düngungs- oder Mahdauflagen, hohe Kompensationen im Bereich von über 100 bis 200 Euro/ha erfordern. Intensiv wirtschaftende Betriebe – gekennzeichnet durch z.B. hohe Viehdichte oder geringen Dauerweideanteil – verlangen höhere Kompensationszahlungen als andere Betriebe. This paper uses data from a discrete choice experiment to investigate the factors affecting participation in agri-environmental schemes in Eiderstedt and Südtondern, two grassland regions in Schleswig- Holstein. As expected, higher payment rates increase farmers’ willingness to sign a conservation contract * Uwe Latacz-Lohmann is also Adjunct Professor in Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of Western Australia. whereas stricter management prescriptions reduce participation. Besides contract design variables, a number of farm-specific variables affect farmers’ willingness to participate. Farmers, for instance, with previous experience in agri-environmental contracting are more likely to choose a contract than those without such experience. Our estimates of marginal willingness-to-accept show that farmers regard contractual obligations relating to fertilizer use and mowing dates as particularly demanding, resulting in high compensation requirements of €100 - 200 per hectare. Farms with high land use intensities – e.g. high stocking rates or low shares of permanent pasture – request higher compensation payments than less intensive farms.

Suggested Citation

  • Breustedt, Gunnar & Schulz, Norbert & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2013. "Ermittlung der Teilnahmebereitschaft an Vertragsnaturschutzprogrammen und der dafür notwendigen Ausgleichszahlungen mit Hilfe eines Discrete-Choice-Experimentes," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 62(04), pages 1-15, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:gjagec:232344
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.232344
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/232344/files/2_Breustedt.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.232344?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric Ruto & Guy Garrod, 2009. "Investigating farmers' preferences for the design of agri-environment schemes: a choice experiment approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(5), pages 631-647.
    2. Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Liebe, Ulf & Hartje, Volkmar, 2009. "Benefits of biodiversity enhancement of nature-oriented silviculture: Evidence from two choice experiments in Germany," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 37-58, January.
    3. Claassen, Roger & Tegene, Abebayehu, 1999. "Agricultural Land Use Choice: A Discrete Choice Approach," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 26-36, April.
    4. Breustedt, Gunnar & Muller-Scheessel, Jorg & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2008. "Forecasting the Adoption of GM Oilseed Rape: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," 82nd Annual Conference, March 31 - April 2, 2008, Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, UK 36771, Agricultural Economics Society.
    5. Gunnar Breustedt & Jörg Müller‐Scheeßel & Uwe Latacz‐Lohmann, 2008. "Forecasting the Adoption of GM Oilseed Rape: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 237-256, June.
    6. Francksen, Tammo & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2008. "Evaluierung von Agrarumweltprogrammen auf Grundlage der Umwelteffizienz landwirtschaftlicher Betriebe," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 57(03-04), pages 1-12.
    7. Breustedt, Gunnar & Muller-Scheessel, Jorg & Meyer-Schatz, Henrika Marie, 2007. "Unter welchen Umständen würden deutsche Landwirte gentechnisch veränderten Raps anbauen? Ein Discrete-Choice-Experiment," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 56(07), pages 1-13.
    8. Maria Espinosa‐Goded & Jesús Barreiro‐Hurlé & Eric Ruto, 2010. "What Do Farmers Want From Agri‐Environmental Scheme Design? A Choice Experiment Approach," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 259-273, June.
    9. Claassen, Roger & Tegene, Abebayehu, 1999. "Agricultural Land Use Choice: A Discrete Choice Approach," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 28(1), pages 1-11, April.
    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. Breustedt, Gunnar & Schulz, Norbert & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2013. "Kalibrierung von Vertragsnaturschutzprogrammen mittels eines zweistufigen Discrete-Choice-Experimentes," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 62(04), pages 1-17, November.
    2. François J Dessart & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & René van Bavel, 2019. "Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: a policy-oriented review," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 417-471.
    3. Breustedt, Gunnar & Schulz, Norbert & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2013. "Kalibrierung von Vertragsnaturschutzprogrammen mittels eines zweistufigen Discrete-Choice-Experimentes," Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, vol. 62(4).
    4. Brown, Calum & Kovács, Eszter & Herzon, Irina & Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio & Albizua, Amaia & Galanaki, Antonia & Grammatikopoulou, Ioanna & McCracken, Davy & Olsson, Johanna Alkan & Zinngrebe, Yves, 2021. "Simplistic understandings of farmer motivations could undermine the environmental potential of the common agricultural policy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).

    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. Breustedt, Gunnar & Schulz, Norbert & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2013. "Ermittlung der Teilnahmebereitschaft an Vertragsnaturschutzprogrammen und der dafür notwendigen Ausgleichszahlungen mit Hilfe eines Discrete-Choice-Experimentes," Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, Journal of International Agricultural Trade and Development, vol. 62(4).
    2. Na-na Wang & Liang-guo Luo & Ya-ru Pan & Xue-mei Ni, 2019. "Use of discrete choice experiments to facilitate design of effective environmentally friendly agricultural policies," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1543-1559, August.
    3. Schreiner, Julia A., 2014. "Farmers’ Valuation of Incentives to Produce GMO-free Milk: A Discrete Choice Experiment," 2014 International European Forum, February 17-21, 2014, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 199373, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    4. Feil, J.-H. & Anastassiadis, F. & Mußhoff, O. & Schilling, P., 2015. "Analysing Farmers’ Use of Price Hedging Instruments: An Experimental Approach," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 50, March.
    5. Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Schulz, Norbert & Breustedt, Gunnar, 2014. "Assessing Farmers' Willingness to Accept "Greening": Insights from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Gremany," 88th Annual Conference, April 9-11, 2014, AgroParisTech, Paris, France 170560, Agricultural Economics Society.
    6. Feil, J.-H. & Anastassiadis, F. & Mußhoff, O. & Kasten, P., 2016. "Analysing Farmers’ Preferences fo Collaborative Arrangements: An Experimental Approach," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 51, March.
    7. Marianne Lefebvre & Masha Maslianskaia-Pautrel & Pauline Laille, 2022. "Alternative adaptation scenarios towards pesticide-free urban green spaces: Welfare implication for French citizens," Post-Print hal-03694169, HAL.
    8. 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).
    9. Cortés-Capano, Gonzalo & Hanley, Nick & Sheremet, Oleg & Hausmann, Anna & Toivonen, Tuuli & Garibotto-Carton, Gustavo & Soutullo, Alvaro & Di Minin, Enrico, 2021. "Assessing landowners’ preferences to inform voluntary private land conservation: The role of non-monetary incentives," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    10. Herring, Matthew W. & Garnett, Stephen T. & Zander, Kerstin K., 2022. "Producing rice while conserving the habitat of an endangered waterbird: Incentives for farmers to integrate water management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    11. Breustedt, Gunnar & Schulz, Norbert & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2013. "Kalibrierung von Vertragsnaturschutzprogrammen mittels eines zweistufigen Discrete-Choice-Experimentes," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 62(04), pages 1-17, November.
    12. Oyakhilomen Oyinbo & Jordan Chamberlin & Miet Maertens, 2020. "Design of Digital Agricultural Extension Tools: Perspectives from Extension Agents in Nigeria," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 798-815, September.
    13. Lizin, Sebastien & Van Passel, Steven & Schreurs, Eloi, 2015. "Farmres' Perceived Cost of Land Use restrictions: A Simulated Purchasing Decision Using Dscrete Choice Experiments," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212054, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Alain Carpentier & Elodie Letort, 2014. "Multicrop Production Models with Multinomial Logit Acreage Shares," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 59(4), pages 537-559, December.
    15. Skevas, Theodoros & Wesseler, Justus & Fevereiro, Pedro, 2009. "Coping with ex-ante regulations for planting Bt maize: the Portuguese experience," MPRA Paper 25609, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Barr, Rhona F. & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Investigating fishers' preferences for the design of marine Payments for Environmental Services schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 91-103.
    17. Niskanen, Olli & Tienhaara, Annika & Haltia, Emmi & Pouta, Eija, 2021. "Farmers’ heterogeneous preferences towards results-based environmental policies," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    18. Kennedy Otieno Pambo & David Jakinda Otieno & Julius Juma Okello, 2017. "Analysis of Consumer Preference for Vitamin A-Fortified Sugar in Kenya," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 29(4), pages 745-768, August.
    19. Plantinga, Andrew J. & Ahn, Soeun, 2002. "Efficient Policies For Environmental Protection: An Econometric Analysis Of Incentives For Land Conversion And Retention," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 27(1), pages 1-18, July.
    20. Chèze, Benoît & David, Maia & Martinet, Vincent, 2020. "Understanding farmers' reluctance to reduce pesticide use: A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).

    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:gjagec:232344. 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/iahubde.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.