IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fao/tejade/v3y2006i1p27-57.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Direct Payments for Environmental Services from Mountain Agriculture in Japan: Evaluating its Effectiveness and Drawing Lessons for Developing Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Takumi Sakuyama

    (Agricultural and Development Economics Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations)

Abstract

This article evaluates the effectiveness of ex-post targeting of the direct payment program for mountain agriculture in Japan. A regression analysis explaining the entry into the program shows that the farm profitability and the production cost were significant positive and negative factor, respectively, in determining the uptake, while the efforts by local governments were a robust factor in facilitating the enrollment. These findings imply ineffective ex-post targeting and call for the differentiation of the premium, alternative incentives to promote forestation for the un-enrolled fields and additional funds targeted to those prefectures with the low uptake ratio. Lessons drawn from the Japanese experience for effective incentive measures in developing countries include the use of composite indicators in designating eligible areas to avoid the risk of insufficient targeting and the engagement of local governments to facilitate the entry through the reduction of transaction costs among participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Takumi Sakuyama, 2006. "Direct Payments for Environmental Services from Mountain Agriculture in Japan: Evaluating its Effectiveness and Drawing Lessons for Developing Countries," The Electronic Journal of Agricultural and Development Economics, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, vol. 3(1), pages 27-57.
  • Handle: RePEc:fao:tejade:v:3:y:2006:i:1:p:27-57
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/009/ag073e/ag073e00.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. JunJie Wu, 2000. "Slippage Effects of the Conservation Reserve Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 979-992.
    2. Gerard Wynn & Bob Crabtree & Jacqueline Potts, 2001. "Modelling Farmer Entry into the Environmentally Sensitive Area Schemes in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 65-82, January.
    3. Masayuki Kashiwagi, 2004. "Direct payment policies for the regeneration of less-favoured areas: a comparative study of the EU and Japan," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(3/4), pages 193-215.
    4. Pagiola, Stefano & Arcenas, Agustin & Platais, Gunars, 2005. "Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-253, February.
    5. Katherine Falconer & Pierre Dupraz & Martin Whitby, 2001. "An Investigation of Policy Administrative Costs Using Panel Data for the English Environmentally Sensitive Areas," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 83-103, January.
    6. Wanhong Yang & Madhu Khanna & Richard Farnsworth & Hayri Önal, 2005. "Is Geographical Targeting Cost-Effective? The Case of the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program in Illinois," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 27(1), pages 70-88.
    7. Ray Challen, 2000. "Institutions, Transaction Costs and Environmental Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1961.
    8. Arild Vatn, 2002. "Multifunctional agriculture: some consequences for international trade regimes," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 29(3), pages 309-327, July.
    9. Cacho, Oscar J. & Marshall, Graham R. & Milne, Mary, 2003. "Smallholder agroforestry projects: Potential for carbon sequestration and poverty alleviation," ESA Working Papers 289093, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Agricultural Development Economics Division (ESA).
    10. Matthews, R C O, 1986. "The Economics of Institutions and the," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(384), pages 903-918, December.
    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. Simona Zollet & Keshav Lall Maharjan, 2021. "Overcoming the Barriers to Entry of Newcomer Sustainable Farmers: Insights from the Emergence of Organic Clusters in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.

    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. Coggan, Anthea & Whitten, Stuart M. & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Influences of transaction costs in environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1777-1784, July.
    2. Jennifer M. Alix-Garcia & Elizabeth N. Shapiro & Katharine R. E. Sims, 2012. "Forest Conservation and Slippage: Evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 613-638.
    3. David Meintrup & Chang Woon Nam, 2009. "Shadow Market Area for Air Pollutants," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 36(4), pages 664-681, August.
    4. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A Global Survey and Review of the Determinants of Transaction Costs of Forestry Carbon Projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-10.
    5. Gwenolé Le Velly & Céline Dutilly, 2016. "Evaluating Payments for Environmental Services: Methodological Challenges," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, February.
    6. B Kelsey Jack & Carolyn Kousky & Katharine R E Sims, 2007. "Lessons Relearned: Can Previous Research on Incentive-Based Mechanisms Point the Way for Payments for Ecosystem Services?," CID Working Papers 15, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    7. Valentová, Michaela & Horák, Martin & Dvořáček, Lukáš, 2020. "Why transaction costs do not decrease over time? A case study of energy efficiency programmes in Czechia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    8. Coggan, Anthea & Buitelaar, Edwin & Whitten, Stuart & Bennett, Jeff, 2013. "Factors that influence transaction costs in development offsets: Who bears what and why?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 222-231.
    9. Yann Desjeux & Pierre Dupraz & Francois Bonnieux & David Baldock & Laura Kröger & John Finn & Davide Viaggi & Volker Beckmann & . Itaes Project, 2006. "ITAES Workshop, Brussels September 13th 2005, Proceedings," Post-Print hal-02818880, HAL.
    10. Sauer, Johannes & Walsh, John, 2011. "ESS versus NVZ – The Cost-Effectiveness of Command-and-Control versus Agreement Based Policy Instruments," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108963, Agricultural Economics Society.
    11. Stephen Hynes & Eoghan Garvey, 2009. "Modelling Farmers’ Participation in an Agri‐environmental Scheme using Panel Data: An Application to the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Ireland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 546-562, September.
    12. Abler, David G., 2004. "Multifunctionality, Agricultural Policy, and Environmental Policy," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 33(1), pages 1-10, April.
    13. Oscar J. Cacho & Graham R. Marshall & Mary Milne, 2003. "Smallholder Agroforestry Projects: Potential for carbon sequestration and poverty alleviation," Working Papers 03-06, Agricultural and Development Economics Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO - ESA).
    14. Weber, Anja Michaela, 2011. "Why do Farmers Spend Different Amounts of Transaction Costs in Agri-Environmental Schemes?," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115738, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Pearson, Leonie J. & Crean, Jason & Badgery, Warwick & Murphy, Brian & Rawson, Andrew & Capon, Timothy & Reeson, Andrew, 2012. "Soil carbon sequestration in mixed farming landscapes: Insights from the Lachlan soil carbon project," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 130973, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    16. Thiel, Andreas & Schleyer, Christian & Hinkel, Jochen & Schlüter, Maja & Hagedorn, Konrad & Bisaro, Sandy & Bobojonov, Ihtiyor & Hamidov, Ahmad, 2016. "Transferring Williamson's discriminating alignment to the analysis of environmental governance of social-ecological interdependence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 159-168.
    17. Leslie Lipper & Prabhu Pingali & Monika Zurek, 2006. "Less-Favoured Areas: Looking Beyond Agriculture Towards Ecosystem Services," Working Papers 06-08, Agricultural and Development Economics Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO - ESA).
    18. Stephen Hynes & Eoghan Garvey, 2008. "Modelling Structural State Dependency in Agri-Environmental Schemes," Working Papers 0827, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    19. Lee, Jean, 2017. "Farmer participation in a climate-smart future: Evidence from the Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 72-79.
    20. Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    cost-effectiveness; direct payment; environmental services; mountain farming; targeting; transaction costs; Japan.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q20 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - General
    • Q21 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry

    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:fao:tejade:v:3:y:2006:i:1:p:27-57. 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: Gustavo Anríquez (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/faoooit.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.