IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v103y2010i8p521-534.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conserving natural resources in olive orchards on sloping land: Alternative goal programming approaches towards effective design of cross-compliance and agri-environmental measures

Author

Listed:
  • Fleskens, Luuk
  • Graaff, Jan de

Abstract

Olive farming on sloping land in southern Europe is facing multiple challenges and it is reasonable to believe that farmers will opt for the abandonment of some systems and intensification or change to organic production of other systems. The issues at stake surpass financial farm viability and two EU policy instruments - cross-compliance and agri-environmental measures (AEM) - are available to address environmental objectives. This paper explores how cross-compliance and AEM policy options may lead to shifts in olive production systems and their social and environmental effects in Trás-os-Montes, NE Portugal over 25 years under two sets of conditions of uncertainty: decision-making by land users and market scenarios. Uncertainty in decision-making is addressed by employing five alternative goal programming models. The models include Linear Programming (LP), Weighted Goal Programming (WGP) and MINMAX Goal Programming (MINMAX GP), the GP variants of which are moreover formulated from a societal (S) and farmer (F) perspective. Uncertainty in market prospects is addressed by projecting olive oil and labour prices and trends in farm subsidies, distinguishing four price combinations in market scenarios. The models were validated by their capability to reproduce the initial configuration of olive production systems. Six policy options are evaluated under the complete ranges of uncertainty factors in a total of 6 x 5 x 4 = 120 model runs. Results show overall large effects of farmer decision-making and market scenarios. The cross-compliance and AEM policy instruments have an unequivocal effect on environmental performance and help to maintain work in rural areas. However, farmer income levels are insensitive to the policies, all work is absorbed by family labour and important environmental issues linked to more intensive systems such as pollution are not addressed. In a case study with the WGP (F) model which best reproduced the initial configuration of production systems, cross-compliance was moreover found to burden farmers under adverse market conditions, while AEM contributed to farmer's objectives under favourable market conditions. A solution would be to focus cross-compliance regulations on intensive systems and offer appropriate AEM for traditional or abandoned orchards. Both policy instruments proved effective, but there is scope for removing substantial overlap between them.

Suggested Citation

  • Fleskens, Luuk & Graaff, Jan de, 2010. "Conserving natural resources in olive orchards on sloping land: Alternative goal programming approaches towards effective design of cross-compliance and agri-environmental measures," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(8), pages 521-534, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:103:y:2010:i:8:p:521-534
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308-521X(10)00073-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Happe, Kathrin & Balmann, Alfons & Kellermann, Konrad & Sahrbacher, Christoph, 2008. "Does structure matter? The impact of switching the agricultural policy regime on farm structures," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 431-444, August.
    2. Sáenz-Segura, Fernando & D'Haese, Marijke & Schipper, Robert A., 2010. "A seasonal model of contracts between a monopsonistic processor and smallholder pepper producers in Costa Rica," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 10-20, January.
    3. Elnagheeb, Abdelmoneim H. & Florkowski, Wojciech J., 1993. "Modeling Perennial Crop Supply: An Illustration From The Pecan Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 25(1), pages 1-10, July.
    4. de Koning, G. H. J. & Verburg, P. H. & Veldkamp, A. & Fresco, L. O., 1999. "Multi-scale modelling of land use change dynamics in Ecuador," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 77-93, August.
    5. Barbier, B. & Bergeron, G., 1999. "Impact of policy interventions on land management in Honduras: results of a bioeconomic model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 1-16, May.
    6. Akiyama, T. & Trivedi, P. K., 1987. "Vintage production approach to perennial crop supply : An application to tea in major producing countries," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-2), pages 133-161.
    7. Nhantumbo, I. & Dent, J. B. & Kowero, G., 2001. "Goal programming: Application in the management of the miombo woodland in Mozambique," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 310-322, January.
    8. Ben C. French & Jim L. Matthews, 1971. "A Supply Response Model for Perennial Crops," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 53(3), pages 478-490.
    9. Happe, Kathrin & Kellermann, Konrad & Balmann, Alfons, 2006. "Agent-based analysis of agricultural policies: An illustration of the agricultural policy simulator AgriPoliS, its adaptation and behavior," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 11(1).
    10. van Ittersum, M. K. & Rabbinge, R. & van Latesteijn, H. C., 1998. "Exploratory land use studies and their role in strategic policy making," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 309-330, November.
    11. Elnagheeb, Abdelmoneim H. & Florkowski, Wojciech J., 1993. "Modeling Perennial Crop Supply: An Illustration from the Pecan Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 187-196, July.
    12. Janssen, Sander & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2007. "Assessing farm innovations and responses to policies: A review of bio-economic farm models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 622-636, June.
    13. Tamiz, Mehrdad & Jones, Dylan & Romero, Carlos, 1998. "Goal programming for decision making: An overview of the current state-of-the-art," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(3), pages 569-581, December.
    14. Stoorvogel, J. J. & Antle, J. M., 2001. "Regional land use analysis: the development of operational tools," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 70(2-3), pages 623-640.
    15. Romero, Carlos, 2001. "Extended lexicographic goal programming: a unifying approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 63-71, February.
    16. de Wit, C. T. & van Keulen, H. & Seligman, N. G. & Spharim, I., 1988. "Application of interactive multiple goal programming techniques for analysis and planning of regional agricultural development," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 211-230.
    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. Salmoral, Gloria & Garrido, Alberto, 2015. "The Common Agricultural Policy as a driver of water quality changes: the case of the Guadalquivir River Basin (southern Spain)," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 4(2), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Mewes, Melanie & Drechsler, Martin & Johst, Karin & Sturm, Astrid & Wätzold, Frank, 2015. "A systematic approach for assessing spatially and temporally differentiated opportunity costs of biodiversity conservation measures in grasslands," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 76-88.
    3. O. Tzoraki & D. Cooper & G. Dörflinger & P. Panagos, 2014. "A new MONERIS in-Stream Retention Module to Account Nutrient Budget of a Temporary River in Cyprus," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(10), pages 2917-2935, August.
    4. Heidari, Mohammad Davoud & Turner, Ian & Ardestani-Jaafari, Amir & Pelletier, Nathan, 2021. "Operations research for environmental assessment of crop-livestock production systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    5. Reidsma, Pytrik & Janssen, Sander & Jansen, Jacques & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2018. "On the development and use of farm models for policy impact assessment in the European Union – A review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 111-125.
    6. Pérez-Fortes, Mar & Laínez-Aguirre, José Miguel & Arranz-Piera, Pol & Velo, Enrique & Puigjaner, Luis, 2012. "Design of regional and sustainable bio-based networks for electricity generation using a multi-objective MILP approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 79-95.
    7. Beltrán-Esteve, Mercedes, 2013. "Assessing technical efficiency in traditional olive grove systems: a directional metadistance function approach," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 13(02), pages 1-24, December.

    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. Devadoss, Stephen & Luckstead, Jeff, 2010. "An analysis of apple supply response," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 265-271, March.
    2. Britz, Wolfgang & van Ittersum, Martin K. & Oude Lansink, Alfons G.J.M. & Heckelei, Thomas, 2012. "Tools for Integrated Assessment in Agriculture. State of the Art and Challenges," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 1(2), pages 1-26, August.
    3. Luz Maria Castro & Fabian Härtl & Santiago Ochoa & Baltazar Calvas & Leonardo Izquierdo & Thomas Knoke, 2018. "Integrated bio-economic models as tools to support land-use decision making: a review of potential and limitations," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 183-211, July.
    4. Uthes, Sandra & Fricke, Katharina & König, Hannes & Zander, Peter & van Ittersum, Martin & Sieber, Stefan & Helming, Katharina & Piorr, Annette & Müller, Klaus, 2010. "Policy relevance of three integrated assessment tools—A comparison with specific reference to agricultural policies," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(18), pages 2136-2152.
    5. Happe, K. & Hutchings, N.J. & Dalgaard, T. & Kellerman, K., 2011. "Modelling the interactions between regional farming structure, nitrogen losses and environmental regulation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(3), pages 281-291, March.
    6. Stoorvogel, J. J. & Antle, J. M. & Crissman, C. C. & Bowen, W., 2004. "The tradeoff analysis model: integrated bio-physical and economic modeling of agricultural production systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 43-66, April.
    7. Şeyda Gür & Tamer Eren, 2018. "Scheduling and Planning in Service Systems with Goal Programming: Literature Review," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-16, November.
    8. Yamashita, Ryohei & Hoshino, Satoshi, 2018. "Development of an agent-based model for estimation of agricultural land preservation in rural Japan," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 264-276.
    9. Parisa Aghajanzadeh-Darzi & Pierre-Alain Jayet & Athanasios Petsakos, 2017. "Improvement of a Bio-Economic Mathematical Programming Model in the Case of On-Farm Source Inputs and Outputs," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 15(3), pages 489-508, September.
    10. Janssen, Sander & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2007. "Assessing farm innovations and responses to policies: A review of bio-economic farm models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 622-636, June.
    11. Viaggi, Davide & Raggi, Meri & Gomez y Paloma, Sergio, 2011. "Farm-household investment behaviour and the CAP decoupling: Methodological issues in assessing policy impacts," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 127-145, January.
    12. Hristov, Jordan & Clough, Yann & Sahlin, Ullrika & Smith, Henrik G. & Stjernman, Martin & Olsson, Ola & Sahrbacher, Amanda & Brady, Mark V., 2020. "Impacts of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy “Greening” reform on agricultural development, biodiversity, and ecosystem services," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 42(4), pages 716-738.
    13. Weerahewa, Jeevika & Dayananda, Dasuni, 2023. "Land use changes and economic effects of alternative fertilizer policies: A simulation analysis with a bio-economic model for a Tank Village of Sri Lanka," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    14. Lu, C. H. & van Ittersum, M. K. & Rabbinge, R., 2004. "A scenario exploration of strategic land use options for the Loess Plateau in northern China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 145-170, February.
    15. Eigner, Amanda E. & Nuppenau, Ernst-August, 2019. "Applied spatial approach of modelling field size changes based on a consideration of farm and landscape interrelations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    16. Brown, Bijon & Schoney, Richard & Nolan, James, 2021. "Assessing the food vs. fuel issue: An agent-based simulation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    17. Fernando García & Francisco Guijarro & Javier Oliver, 2021. "A Multicriteria Goal Programming Model for Ranking Universities," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-17, February.
    18. Sardorbek Musayev & Jonathan Mellor & Tara Walsh & Emmanouil Anagnostou, 2022. "Application of Agent-Based Modeling in Agricultural Productivity in Rural Area of Bahir Dar, Ethiopia," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-22, March.
    19. Cittadini, E.D. & Lubbers, M.T.M.H. & de Ridder, N. & van Keulen, H. & Claassen, G.D.H., 2008. "Exploring options for farm-level strategic and tactical decision-making in fruit production systems of South Patagonia, Argentina," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 189-198, October.
    20. Kremmydas, Dimitris & Athanasiadis, Ioannis N. & Rozakis, Stelios, 2018. "A review of Agent Based Modeling for agricultural policy evaluation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 95-106.

    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:eee:agisys:v:103:y:2010:i:8:p:521-534. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    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.