IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aiea14/173095.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Alternative subsidy scenarios for different agricultural practices: A sustainability assessment using fuzzy multi-criteria analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Ragona, Maddalena
  • Albertazzi, Sergio
  • Nicolli, Francesco
  • Mazzanti, Massimiliano
  • Montini, Anna
  • Vitali, Giuliano
  • Canavari, Maurizio

Abstract

The recent Common Agricultural Policy reform (CAP14) at the European level links the granting of aid to farmers to adhering to environmentally-friendly farming practices. It therefore becomes important to assess the overall effectiveness of such a policy by taking into account different economic and environmental criteria. In this work, an ex ante assessment of different agricultural policy scenarios in Italy is undertaken at the national level, through the adoption of a fuzzy multi-criteria analysis approach, to account for the different economic and environmental aspects (indicators) of each scenario. Italian agricultural holdings were divided into homogeneous groups (according to farm typology, location, and environment), in order to determine the most preferable scenario for each group. Results are extremely heterogeneous across the macro areas, the farm typologies, and the climatic zones, and it is not possible to determine a ‘good-for-all’ scenario. However, we can observe that when all indicators are assigned an equal weight and also when environmental indicators are assigned a higher weight, the preferred scenario for the majority of groups is the alternative scenario where a tax of 30% on pesticides is added to the CAP14. On the other side, when economic indicators have a higher weight, the situation of subsidies preceding CAP14 (base subsidies and environmental subsidies, with no differentiation among conventional and organic farming) seems to be the ‘best’ scenario for all groups, with one exception.

Suggested Citation

  • Ragona, Maddalena & Albertazzi, Sergio & Nicolli, Francesco & Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Montini, Anna & Vitali, Giuliano & Canavari, Maurizio, 2014. "Alternative subsidy scenarios for different agricultural practices: A sustainability assessment using fuzzy multi-criteria analysis," 2014 Third Congress, June 25-27, 2014, Alghero, Italy 173095, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aiea14:173095
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.173095
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/173095/files/Alternative%20subsidy%20scenarios%20for%20different%20agricultural%20practices%20A%20sustainability%20assessment%20using%20fuzzy%20multi-criteria%20analysis_%20Ragona_%20M%20_%20Albertazzi_%20S%20_%20Nicolli_%20F%20_%20Mazzanti_M%20_%20Montini%20A_%20Vitali_G_Canavari_%20M.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.173095?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. Hayashi, Kiyotada, 2000. "Multicriteria analysis for agricultural resource management: A critical survey and future perspectives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 486-500, April.
    2. Patrick Meyer & Marc Roubens, 2005. "Choice, Ranking and Sorting in Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision Aid," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 471-503, Springer.
    3. Mazzocchi, Mario & Ragona, Maddalena & Zanoli, Agostina, 2013. "A fuzzy multi-criteria approach for the ex-ante impact assessment of food safety policies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 177-189.
    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. Grabisch, Michel & Kojadinovic, Ivan & Meyer, Patrick, 2008. "A review of methods for capacity identification in Choquet integral based multi-attribute utility theory: Applications of the Kappalab R package," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 766-785, April.
    2. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    3. Majid Ebrahimi & Hamid Nejadsoleymani & Mohammad Reza Mansouri Daneshvar, 2019. "Land suitability map and ecological carrying capacity for the recognition of touristic zones in the Kalat region, Iran: a multi-criteria analysis based on AHP and GIS," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 697-718, October.
    4. Hajkowicz, Stefan & Higgins, Andrew, 2008. "A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 255-265, January.
    5. Asimina Kouriati & Anna Tafidou & Evgenia Lialia & Angelos Prentzas & Christina Moulogianni & Eleni Dimitriadou & Thomas Bournaris, 2024. "A Multicriteria Decision Analysis Model for Optimal Land Uses: Guiding Farmers under the New European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy (2023–2027)," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-22, June.
    6. Julio Berbel & M. Mesa-Jurado & Juan Pistón, 2011. "Value of Irrigation Water in Guadalquivir Basin (Spain) by Residual Value Method," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(6), pages 1565-1579, April.
    7. Bottero, M. & Ferretti, V. & Figueira, J.R. & Greco, S. & Roy, B., 2018. "On the Choquet multiple criteria preference aggregation model: Theoretical and practical insights from a real-world application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 120-140.
    8. Rohmer, S.U.K. & Gerdessen, J.C. & Claassen, G.D.H., 2019. "Sustainable supply chain design in the food system with dietary considerations: A multi-objective analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1149-1164.
    9. Haidar Howari & Mohd Parvez & Osama Khan & Aiyeshah Alhodaib & Abdulrahman Mallah & Zeinebou Yahya, 2023. "Multi-Objective Optimization for Ranking Waste Biomass Materials Based on Performance and Emission Parameters in a Pyrolysis Process—An AHP–TOPSIS Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, February.
    10. Minviel, Jean Joseph & De Witte, Kristof, 2017. "The influence of public subsidies on farm technical efficiency: A robust conditional nonparametric approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(3), pages 1112-1120.
    11. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2007. "An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM, I: The case of two categories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 217-245, April.
    12. A. Psomas & I. Vryzidis & A. Spyridakos & M. Mimikou, 2021. "MCDA approach for agricultural water management in the context of water–energy–land–food nexus," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 689-723, March.
    13. Stefan A. Hajkowicz, 2012. "For the Greater Good? A Test for Strategic Bias in Group Environmental Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 331-344, May.
    14. Sean Pascoe & Renae Tobin & Jill Windle & Toni Cannard & Nadine Marshall & Zobaidul Kabir & Nicole Flint, 2016. "Developing a Social, Cultural and Economic Report Card for a Regional Industrial Harbour," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-19, February.
    15. Zenebe Gebreegziabher & Kooten, G. Cornelis van, 2016. "Single versus Multiple Objective(s) Decision Making: An Application to Subsistence Farms in Northern Ethiopia," Ethiopian Journal of Economics, Ethiopian Economics Association, vol. 24(2), August.
    16. Hojatollah Khedrigharibvand & Hossein Azadi & Dereje Teklemariam & Ehsan Houshyar & Philippe Maeyer & Frank Witlox, 2019. "Livelihood alternatives model for sustainable rangeland management: a review of multi-criteria decision-making techniques," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 11-36, February.
    17. Luis Diaz-Balteiro & Carlos Iglesias-Merchan & Carlos Romero & Silvestre García de Jalón, 2020. "The Sustainable Management of Land and Fisheries Resources Using Multicriteria Techniques: A Meta-Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, October.
    18. María Carmen Carnero & Andrés Gómez, 2019. "Optimization of Decision Making in the Supply of Medicinal Gases Used in Health Care," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-31, May.
    19. Bartolini, Fabio & Gallerani, Vittorio & Viaggi, Davide, 2008. "Ex-Ante Evaluation Of Agri-Environmental Schemes: Combining Elements Of Private And Public Decision Making," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6639, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Fernandez, Eduardo & Navarro, Jorge & Bernal, Sergio, 2009. "Multicriteria sorting using a valued indifference relation under a preference disaggregation paradigm," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(2), pages 602-609, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; Land Economics/Use; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods; Risk and Uncertainty;
    All these keywords.

    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:aiea14:173095. 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.