IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/endeec/v8y2003i02p331-349_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the use of cost-benefit analysis for the evaluation of farm household investments in natural resource conservation

Author

Listed:
  • Hoogeveen, Hans
  • Oostendorp, Remco

Abstract

Farm households in developing countries are generally credit constrained. This forces them to simultaneously take production and consumption decisions. In this paper, a two-period lifecycle model of the farm household is constructed and the household's investment response to changes in land and agricultural output prices are derived theoretically. It is shown that in the absence of credit markets household responses to exogenous price changes may differ from the predictions of cost–benefit analysis. Farm household responses are also derived for the case where price increases for land and agricultural output are accompanied by the introduction of a credit market. For this case the results show that farm household reactions are in accordance with predictions made by cost–benefit analysis. An empirical case study from Bénin underscores the relevance of considering access to credit in establishing whether investments in soil conservation are beneficial to farm households.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoogeveen, Hans & Oostendorp, Remco, 2003. "On the use of cost-benefit analysis for the evaluation of farm household investments in natural resource conservation," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 331-349, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:endeec:v:8:y:2003:i:02:p:331-349_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1355770X03000172/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:cup:endeec:v:8:y:2003:i:02:p:331-349_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ede .

    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.