IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aiea13/150235.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating the potential contribution of spatially differentiated payments to the efficiency of Agri-Environmental Measures: A resource allocation model for Emilia Romagna (Italy)

Author

Listed:
  • Vergamini, Daniele
  • Raggi, Meri
  • Viaggi, Davide

Abstract

The European Agri-Environmental Measures (AEMs) have a relevant role in encouraging a sustainable resources use and developing environmentally-friendly farming practices. AEMs account for more than half of the rural development budget of the Common Agriculture Policy. However, despite their importance, several factors influence the effectiveness of the measures, within which the poor spatial target is still a major cause of low effectiveness. Therefore, improving the spatial targeting of these policy tools could improve their cost-effectiveness, increasing the efficiency of Agri-Environmental Schemes (AES) and support better policy design solutions. The objective of this paper is to develop an optimization model for the AEMs jointly aiming at optimal targeting and payment setting with a focus on resource and incentive compatibility differentiated by zone. Moreover the model investigates the integration of information coming from spatial analysis of participation to AEMs with mathematical programming at regional level. This is a rather new methodology which could be uses to model farmers’ characteristics and compliance cost in their spatial dimension. Given that both the costs and the compensation payments are subject to spatial variation, this study simulates also the potential contribution of spatially differentiated compensation payments to efficient targeting of measure 214.1 in Emilia Romagna (Italy). Results highlight that the differentiate payment scheme gives a significant cost saving over flat rate mechanism by reducing farmers’ rents and consequently the deadweight loss for cost effectiveness of the measures. The method used, which improves the acknowledgement of the spatial information, may have a potential for the design process of Agri-Environmental Schemes (AES) and support better policy design solution.

Suggested Citation

  • Vergamini, Daniele & Raggi, Meri & Viaggi, Davide, 2013. "Evaluating the potential contribution of spatially differentiated payments to the efficiency of Agri-Environmental Measures: A resource allocation model for Emilia Romagna (Italy)," 2013 Second Congress, June 6-7, 2013, Parma, Italy 150235, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aiea13:150235
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.150235
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/150235/files/161_Vergamini.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.150235?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. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    2. Frank Wätzold & Martin Drechsler, 2005. "Spatially Uniform versus Spatially Heterogeneous Compensation Payments for Biodiversity-Enhancing Land-Use Measures," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 31(1), pages 73-93, May.
    3. McCann, Laura & Colby, Bonnie & Easter, K. William & Kasterine, Alexander & Kuperan, K.V., 2005. "Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 527-542, March.
    4. Gallerani, Vittorio & Raggi, Meri & Viaggi, Davide, 2008. "Evaluating The Potential Contribution Of Contract Auctions To Aep'S Efficiency," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6660, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Viaggi, D. & Raggi, M. & Gallerani, V., 2012. "Evaluating the potential contribution of contract auctions to Agri-Environmental Policy efficiency: A simulation model for Emilia-Romagna (Italy)," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 1-11.
    6. Johst, Karin & Drechsler, Martin & Watzold, Frank, 2002. "An ecological-economic modelling procedure to design compensation payments for the efficient spatio-temporal allocation of species protection measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 37-49, April.
    7. Gunnar Breustedt & Hendrik Habermann, 2011. "The Incidence of EU Per‐Hectare Payments on Farmland Rental Rates: A Spatial Econometric Analysis of German Farm‐Level Data," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(1), pages 225-243, February.
    8. Ziolkowska, Jadwiga, 2010. "Impact of Environmental Objectives on Optimal Budget Allocations for Agro-environmental Measures — A Case Study for Poland," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 23(2), July.
    9. Babcock, Bruce A. & Lakshminarayan, P. G. & Wu, J. & Zilberman, David, 1997. "Targeting Tools for the Purchase of Environmental Amenities," Staff General Research Papers Archive 5220, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    10. Kolstad, Charles D., 1987. "Uniformity versus differentiation in regulating externalities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 386-399, December.
    11. Paul J. Ferraro, 2003. "Assigning priority to environmental policy interventions in a heterogeneous world," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(1), pages 27-43.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Wätzold, Frank & Drechsler, Martin, 2014. "Agglomeration payment, agglomeration bonus or homogeneous payment?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 85-101.
    2. Soh, Moonwon & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yu, Edward & Boyer, Christopher & English, Burton, 2018. "Targeting Payments for Ecosystem Services Given Ecological and Economic Objectives," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266502, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    3. Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2010. "Performance payments: A new strategy to conserve large carnivores in the tropics?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 405-412, December.
    4. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    5. Whitten, Stuart M., 2017. "Designing and implementing conservation tender metrics: Twelve core considerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 561-571.
    6. Drechsler, Martin & Wätzold, Frank & Johst, Karin & Shogren, Jason F., 2010. "An agglomeration payment for cost-effective biodiversity conservation in spatially structured landscapes," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 261-275, April.
    7. Fabio Bartolini & Daniele Vergamini, 2019. "Understanding the Spatial Agglomeration of Participation in Agri-Environmental Schemes: The Case of the Tuscany Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, May.
    8. Talberth, John & Selman, Mindy & Walker, Sara & Gray, Erin, 2015. "Pay for Performance: Optimizing public investments in agricultural best management practices in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 252-261.
    9. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Hoang, Long Phi & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A comparative study of transaction costs of payments for forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 141-149.
    10. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    11. Jean-Sauveur Ay, 2015. "Information sur l’hétérogénéité de la terre et délégation de la régulation foncière," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 125(3), pages 453-474.
    12. Drechsler, Martin & Grimm, Volker & Mysiak, Jaroslav & Watzold, Frank, 2007. "Differences and similarities between ecological and economic models for biodiversity conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 232-241, April.
    13. Jens Abildtrup & Anne Stenger, 2022. "Report on valuation methods," Working Papers hal-04068881, HAL.
    14. Sharma, Bijay P. & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yu, T. Edward, 2019. "Designing cost-efficient payments for forest-based carbon sequestration: An auction-based modeling approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 182-194.
    15. Zhidong Li & Boru Su & Moucheng Liu, 2022. "Research Progress on the Theory and Practice of Grassland Eco-Compensation in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    16. Catharina Druckenbrod & Volker Beckmann, 2018. "Production-Integrated Compensation in Environmental Offsets—A Review of a German Offset Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-22, November.
    17. Dörschner, T. & Musshoff, O., 2015. "How do incentive-based environmental policies affect environment protection initiatives of farmers? An experimental economic analysis using the example of species richness," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 90-103.
    18. Kim, Taeyoung & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Larson, Eric R. & Armsworth, Paul R., 2014. "Protected area acquisition costs show economies of scale with area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 122-132.
    19. Sharma, Bijay P. & Cho, Seong-Hoon, 2021. "Analyzing how forest-based amenity values and carbon storage benefits affect spatial targeting for conservation investment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    20. Vergamini, Daniele & White, Benedict & Viaggi, Davide, 2015. "Agri-Environmental Policies design in Europe, USA and Australia: is an auction more cost-effective than a self-selecting contract schedule?," 2015 Fourth Congress, June 11-12, 2015, Ancona, Italy 207357, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aiea13:150235. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aieaaea.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.