IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jageco/v52y2001i1p139-152.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economics of Soil Conservation: The Upper Mahaweli Watershed of Sir Lanka

Author

Listed:
  • Gary R. Vieth
  • Herath Gunatilake
  • Linda J. Cox

Abstract

This paper estimates the benefits and costs of soil conservation in the Upper Mahaweli Watershed of Sir Lanka. The costs of soil erosion control include the implementation costs of control measures, while the benefits are reductions in the costs of soil erosion. In contrast to many studies in developed countries, the on‐site benefit of soil erosion control in Sri Lanka is estimated to be greater than the off‐site benefit While a social benefit‐cost analysis demonstrates that it is socially desirable to implement conservation measures, the private financial analyses indicate that it is feasible for individual farmers to adopt the conservation measures. Despite private economic feasibility, programs addressing farmers' reluctance to adopt soil conservation measures may be preferable to public intervention in soil conservation activities when the on‐site benefits are greater than the off‐site benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Gary R. Vieth & Herath Gunatilake & Linda J. Cox, 2001. "Economics of Soil Conservation: The Upper Mahaweli Watershed of Sir Lanka," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 139-152, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jageco:v:52:y:2001:i:1:p:139-152
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1477-9552.2001.tb00914.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2001.tb00914.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2001.tb00914.x?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. Marc O. Ribaudo, 1986. "Consideration of Offsite Impacts in Targeting Soil Conservation Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(4), pages 402-411.
    2. W. Vuuren & J. C. Giraldez & D. P. Stonehouse, 1997. "The Social Returns of Agricultural Practices for Promoting Water Quality Improvement," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 45(3), pages 219-234, November.
    3. Segarra, Eduardo & Taylor, Daniel B., 1987. "Farm Level Dynamic Analysis Of Soil Conservation: An Application To The Piedmont Area Of Virginia," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 19(2), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    5. John A. Miranowski, 1984. "Impacts of Productivity Loss on Crop Production and Management in a Dynamic Economic Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(1), pages 61-71.
    6. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    7. Douglas Southgate & Robert Macke, 1989. "The Downstream Benefits of Soil Conservation in Third World Hydroelectric Watersheds," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 65(1), pages 38-48.
    8. Stefano Pagiola, 1996. "Price policy and returns to soil conservation in semi-arid Kenya," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 8(3), pages 225-271, October.
    9. Glenn Fox & Ed J. Dickson, 1990. "The Economics of Erosion and Sediment Control in Southwestern Ontario," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 38(1), pages 23-44, March.
    10. Alberto Veloz & Douglas Southgate & Fred Hitzhusen & Robert Macgregor, 1985. "The Economics of Erosion Control in a Subtropical Watershed: A Dominican Case," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(2), pages 145-155.
    11. Miranowski, John, 1984. "Impacts of Productivity Loss on Crop Production and Management in a Dynamic Economic Model," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10708, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Moore, Walter B. & McCarl, Bruce A., 1987. "Off-Site Costs Of Soil Erosion: A Case Study In The Willamette Valley," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 12(1), pages 1-8, July.
    13. Paul R. Portney, 1994. "The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 3-17, Fall.
    14. Oscar R. Burt, 1981. "Farm Level Economics of Soil Conservation in the Palouse Area of the Northwest," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 63(1), pages 83-92.
    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. World Bank, 2010. "Sri Lanka - Valuation of Environmental Services in Sri Lanka : A Case Study of Soil and Watershed Benefits in the Southern Province," World Bank Publications - Reports 12488, The World Bank Group.

    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. 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.
    2. John B. Loomis, 2013. "Incorporating distributional issues into benefit–cost analysis: why, how, and two empirical examples using non-market valuation," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 9, pages 294-316, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Lori D. Snyder & Robert N. Stavins & Alexander F. Wagner, 2003. "Private Options to Use Public Goods Exploiting Revealed Preferences to Estimate Environmental Benefits," Working Papers 2003.49, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert Cameron Mitchell & Stanley Presser, 1998. "Referendum Design and Contingent Valuation: The NOAA Panel's No-Vote Recommendation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(2), pages 335-338, May.
    5. John C. Whitehead & Timothy C. Haab & Ju‐Chin Huang, 1998. "Part‐Whole Bias in Contingent Valuation: Will Scope Effects Be Detected with Inexpensive Survey Methods?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 160-168, July.
    6. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
    7. Roach, Brian & Wade, William W., 2006. "Policy evaluation of natural resource injuries using habitat equivalency analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 421-433, June.
    8. Carson, Richard T. & Hanemann, W. Michael & Kopp, Raymond J. & Krosnick, Jon A. & Mitchell, Robert C. & Presser, Stanley & Ruud, Paul A. & Smith, V. Kerry & Conaway, Michael & Martin, Kerry, 1996. "Was the NOAA Panel Correct about Contingent Valuation?," Discussion Papers 10503, Resources for the Future.
    9. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    10. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    11. Grüner, Hans Peter & Muller, Daniel, 2016. "Measuring political information rents: Evidence from the European agricultural reform," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 107-126.
    12. Stephanie Simpson & Brid Gleeson Hanna, 2010. "Willingness to pay for a clear night sky: use of the contingent valuation method," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(11), pages 1095-1103.
    13. Bruno S. Frey & Simon Luechinger & Alois Stutzer, 2007. "Calculating Tragedy: Assessing The Costs Of Terrorism," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(1), pages 1-24, February.
    14. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    15. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    16. Renan Goetz & David Zilberman, 1995. "Mining the soil: Agricultural production system on peatland," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(2), pages 119-138, September.
    17. Caffey, Rex H. & Wang, Hua & Petrolia, Daniel R., 2014. "Trajectory economics: Assessing the flow of ecosystem services from coastal restoration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 74-84.
    18. John C. Whitehead, 2024. "They doth protest too much, methinks: Reply to “Reply to Whitehead”," Working Papers 24-04, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    19. Timothy C. Haab & Matthew G. Interis & Daniel R. Petrolia & John C. Whitehead, 2013. "From Hopeless to Curious? Thoughts on Hausman's 'Dubious to Hopeless' Critique of Contingent Valuation," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 35(4), pages 593-612.
    20. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2016. "Constructing markets: environmental economics and the contingent valuation controversy," MPRA Paper 78814, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:bla:jageco:v:52:y:2001:i:1:p:139-152. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-857X .

    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.