IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/revage/v29y2007i1p87-102..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Environmental Impact of European Farming: How Legitimate Are Agri-Environmental Payments?

Author

Listed:
  • Thilo W. Glebe

Abstract

Offering agri-environmental payments to address the various positive and negative environmental nonmarket effects of European Union agriculture might be an efficient way of dealing with market imperfections. However, the complex interaction between farming practices and agri-environmental effects makes it difficult to assess what level of payments is justified under World Trade Organization's Green Box provisions. In reviewing the literature on positive and negative externalities of European farming on the environment, we find evidence to suggest that paying for agri-environmental improvements may be appropriate under the Green Box provisions, even if the payments have a positive production effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Thilo W. Glebe, 2007. "The Environmental Impact of European Farming: How Legitimate Are Agri-Environmental Payments?," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(1), pages 87-102.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:revage:v:29:y:2007:i:1:p:87-102.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-9353.2006.00331.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Edwards, Geoff & Fraser, Iain, 2001. "Reconsidering agri-environmental policy permitted by the Uruguay round agreement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 313-326, May.
    2. G. D. Garrod & K. G. Willis, 1995. "Valuing The Benefits Of The South Downs Environmentally Sensitive Area," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 160-173, May.
    3. E. Wesley F. Peterson, 2000. "The Design of Supranational Organizations for the Provision of International Public Goods: Global Environmental Protection," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 22(2), pages 355-369.
    4. Alan Swinbank, 1999. "EU Agricultural, Agenda 2000 and the WTO Commitments," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 41-54, January.
    5. Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Carel Van der Hamsvoort, 1997. "Auctioning Conservation Contracts: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(2), pages 407-418.
    6. Brouwer, Roy & Slangen, Louis H G, 1998. "Contingent Valuation of the Public Benefits of Agricultural Wildlife Management: The Case of Dutch Peat Meadow Land," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 25(1), pages 53-72.
    7. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249, September.
    8. Charles W. Abdalla, 1994. "Groundwater Values from Avoidance Cost Studies: Implications for Policy and Future Research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1062-1067.
    9. Kevin J. Boyle & Gregory L. Poe & John C. Bergstrom, 1994. "What Do We Know About Groundwater Values? Preliminary Implications from a Meta Analysis of Contingent-Valuation Studies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1055-1061.
    10. Kline, Jeffrey & Wichelns, Dennis, 1996. "Measuring Public Preferences for the Environmental Amenities Provided by Farmland," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 23(4), pages 421-436.
    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. Thilo W. Glebe & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2008. "Assessing the production and welfare effects of agri-environmental policy: a conceptual analysis," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 1(1), pages 75-92.
    2. Liu, Tian & Hu, Weiyan & Song, Yan & Zhang, Anlu, 2020. "Exploring spillover effects of ecological lands: A spatial multilevel hedonic price model of the housing market in Wuhan, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    3. Wossink, Ada & Swinton, Scott M., 2007. "Jointness in production and farmers' willingness to supply non-marketed ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 297-304, December.
    4. Bertoni, Danilo & Olper, Alessandro, 2012. "The Political Economy Of Agri-Environmental Measures: An Empirical Assessment At The Eu Regional Level," APSTRACT: Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, AGRIMBA, vol. 6(3-4), pages 1-12, November.
    5. Dr. Jadwiga Ziolkowska, 2009. "Environmental benefit, side effects and objective-oriented financing of agri-environmental measures: case study of Poland," International Journal of Business and Economic Sciences Applied Research (IJBESAR), International Hellenic University (IHU), Kavala Campus, Greece (formerly Eastern Macedonia and Thrace Institute of Technology - EMaTTech), vol. 2(1), pages 71-88, June.
    6. Jane Mills & Peter Gaskell & Julie Ingram & Janet Dwyer & Matt Reed & Christopher Short, 2017. "Engaging farmers in environmental management through a better understanding of behaviour," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(2), pages 283-299, June.

    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. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    2. Gordon, Simon, 2003. "Economic Instruments For Nonpoint Source Water Pollution: Options For The Swan-Canning River System," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57873, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. Katrin Oltmer & Peter Nijkamp & Raymond Florax & Floor Brouwer, 2000. "A Meta-Analysis of Environmental Impacts of Agri-Environmental Policies in the European Union," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 00-083/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    4. Peter Bogetoft & Kurt Nielsen, 2002. "DEA Based Yardstick Competition in Natural Resource Management," CIE Discussion Papers 2002-04, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics.
    5. Thilo W. Glebe & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2008. "Assessing the production and welfare effects of agri-environmental policy: a conceptual analysis," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 1(1), pages 75-92.
    6. Charles F. Mason & Lucija A. Muehlenbachs & Sheila M. Olmstead, 2015. "The Economics of Shale Gas Development," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 269-289, October.
    7. John C. Whitehead & George Van Houtven, "undated". "Methods for Valuing the Benefits of the Safe Drinking Water Act: Review and Assessment," Working Papers 9705, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
    8. Ojea, Elena & Loureiro, Maria L., 2011. "Identifying the scope effect on a meta-analysis of biodiversity valuation studies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 706-724, September.
    9. Glebe, Thilo W., 2006. "Optimale Vertragsdifferenzierung in der Agrarumweltpolitik," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 55(04), pages 1-9.
    10. Frank Gollop & Gregory P. Swinand, 2001. "Total Resource Productivity. Accounting for Changing Environmental Quality," NBER Chapters, in: New Developments in Productivity Analysis, pages 587-608, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Kotchen, Matthew J. & Salant, Stephen W., 2011. "A free lunch in the commons," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 245-253, May.
    12. Yu-Bong Lai, 2004. "Trade liberalization, consumption externalities and the environment," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 17(5), pages 1-9.
    13. Latacz-Lohmann, U. & Schilizzi, S., 2008. "Quantifying the Benefits of Conservation Auctions: Evidence from an Economic Experiment," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 43, March.
    14. Ni, Jinlan & Wei, Chu & Du, Limin, 2015. "Revealing the political decision toward Chinese carbon abatement: Based on equity and efficiency criteria," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 609-621.
    15. Pouta, Eija & Myyra, Sami & Hanninen, Harri, 2009. "Heterogeneous farmland owners: two approaches for objective based classification," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 50787, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Giancarlo Giudici & Massimiliano Guerini & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra, 2019. "The creation of cleantech startups at the local level: the role of knowledge availability and environmental awareness," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 815-830, April.
    17. Grüll, Georg & Taschini, Luca, 2011. "Cap-and-trade properties under different hybrid scheme designs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 107-118, January.
    18. Na Li Dawson & Kathleen Segerson, 2008. "Voluntary Agreements with Industries: Participation Incentives with Industry-Wide Targets," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(1), pages 97-114.
    19. Sam Fankhauser & Cameron Hepburn, 2009. "Carbon markets in space and time," GRI Working Papers 3, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    20. Ehigiamusoe, Kizito Uyi & Lean, Hooi Hooi & Smyth, Russell, 2020. "The moderating role of energy consumption in the carbon emissions-income nexus in middle-income countries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).

    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:oup:revage:v:29:y:2007:i:1:p:87-102.. 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: Oxford University Press or Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.