IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaa132/139491.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Targeting And Spatial Impacts Of Agri-Environmental Support – Spatial Econometric Analysis Of Agri–Environmental Measures In Slovenia

Author

Listed:
  • Juvancic, Luka
  • Travnikar, Tanja
  • Glavan, Matjaz
  • Cvejic, Rozalija
  • Pintar, Marina

Abstract

The paper presents results of a spatial analysis of agri-environmental (A-E) measures in Slovenia. Spatial targeting and spatial patterns of A-E schemes are analyzed by a combination of exploratory spatial data analysis and spatial econometrics. Results suggest that A-E schemes in Slovenia are poorly spatially targeted against environmental priorities and needs in terms of water and biodiversity protection. This can be attributed to the fact that the most widely implemented A-E schemes in the country are implemented horizontally, with no spatially explicit criteria. Exploratory Spatial Data Analysis reveals spatial clusters of participation in A-E schemes, which is additionally confirmed by the results of the spatial econometric analysis. Participation in A-E schemes in general decreases with the average farm size of the area, and increases with per hectare CAP Pillar I payment rights and EAFRD payments. On the other hand, results of the spatial econometric analysis suggest that participation in organic farming appears to be a rational choice in areas with prevailing extensive, grassland-based farming. Results therefore suggest that farms maximize revenues from A-E schemes. Spatial clustering of areas with respect to the participation in A-E schemes occurs also in the absence of explicit spatial targeting and is closely linked with potential revenues from this source.

Suggested Citation

  • Juvancic, Luka & Travnikar, Tanja & Glavan, Matjaz & Cvejic, Rozalija & Pintar, Marina, 2012. "Targeting And Spatial Impacts Of Agri-Environmental Support – Spatial Econometric Analysis Of Agri–Environmental Measures In Slovenia," 132nd Seminar, October 25-27, 2012, Skopje, Republic of Macedonia 139491, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa132:139491
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.139491
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/139491/files/Juvancic.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.139491?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. Jussi Lankoski & Erik Lichtenberg & Markku Ollikainen, 2010. "Agri-Environmental Program Compliance in a Heterogeneous Landscape," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 1-22, September.
    2. Harry H. Kelejian & Dennis P. Robinson, 1995. "Spatial Correlation: A Suggested Alternative to the Autoregressive Model," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Luc Anselin & Raymond J. G. M. Florax (ed.), New Directions in Spatial Econometrics, chapter 3, pages 75-95, Springer.
    3. Vaclav Vojtech, 2010. "Policy Measures Addressing Agri-environmental Issues," OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 24, OECD Publishing.
    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. Renan-Ulrich Goetz & Yolanda Martínez, 2013. "Nonpoint source pollution and two-part instruments," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 15(3), pages 237-258, July.
    2. Cem Ertur & Thiaw Kalidou, 2005. "Growth and Spatial Dependence - The Mankiw, Romer and Weil model revisited," ERSA conference papers ersa05p660, European Regional Science Association.
    3. Bernard Fingleton, 2000. "Spatial Econometrics, Economic Geography, Dynamics and Equilibrium: A ‘Third Way’?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(8), pages 1481-1498, August.
    4. Barbara Langlois & Vincent Martinet, 2023. "Defining cost-effective ways to improve ecosystem services provision in agroecosystems," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 123-165, June.
    5. Jordi Pons-Novell & Elisabet Viladecans-Marsal, 1999. "Kaldor's Laws and Spatial Dependence: Evidence for the European Regions," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(5), pages 443-451.
    6. Hongxing Liu & Wendong Zhang & Elena Irwin & Jeffrey Kast & Noel Aloysius & Jay Martin & Margaret Kalcic, 2020. "Best Management Practices and Nutrient Reduction: An Integrated Economic-Hydrologic Model of the Western Lake Erie Basin," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 96(4), pages 510-530.
    7. JesúS Mur & F. Javier Trívez, 2003. "Unit Roots and Deterministic Trends in Spatial Econometric Models," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 26(3), pages 289-312, July.
    8. Zhenlin Yang, 2013. "LM Tests of Spatial Dependence Based on Bootstrap Critical Values," Working Papers 03-2013, Singapore Management University, School of Economics.
    9. Baltagi, Badi H., 2006. "Random Effects And Spatial Autocorrelation With Equal Weights," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(5), pages 973-984, October.
    10. Kim, Youngho & Lichtenberg, Erik & Newburn, David, 2022. "Payments and Penalties in Ecosystem Services Programs," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322103, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Fei Jin & Lung-fei Lee, 2020. "Asymptotic properties of a spatial autoregressive stochastic frontier model," Journal of Spatial Econometrics, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-40, December.
    12. Kristofer Månsson & Ghazi Shukur & Pär Sjölander, 2013. "Testing for panel unit roots in the presence of spatial dependency," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(29), pages 4152-4159, October.
    13. Reinhold Kosfeld & Jorgen Lauridsen, 2009. "Dynamic spatial modelling of regional convergence processes," Studies in Empirical Economics, in: Giuseppe Arbia & Badi H. Baltagi (ed.), Spatial Econometrics, pages 245-261, Springer.
    14. Luisa Corrado & Bernard Fingleton, 2012. "Where Is The Economics In Spatial Econometrics?," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 210-239, May.
    15. Ancuta Isbasoiu & Pierre-Alain Jayet & Stéphane De Cara, 2021. "Increasing food production and mitigating agricultural greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union: impacts of carbon pricing and calorie production targeting," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(2), pages 409-440, April.
    16. Pesaran, M. Hashem & Tosetti, Elisa, 2011. "Large panels with common factors and spatial correlation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 161(2), pages 182-202, April.
    17. Joel Karlsson & Jonas Månsson, 2014. "Getting a full-time job as a part-time unemployed: How much does spatial context matter?," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(1), pages 179-195, August.
    18. James Shortle & Richard D. Horan, 2017. "Nutrient Pollution: A Wicked Challenge for Economic Instruments," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(02), pages 1-39, April.
    19. López, Fernando & Matilla-García, Mariano & Mur, Jesús & Marín, Manuel Ruiz, 2010. "A non-parametric spatial independence test using symbolic entropy," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2-3), pages 106-115, May.
    20. Lötjönen, Sanna & Ollikainen, Markku & Kotamäki, Niina & Huttunen, Markus & Huttunen, Inese, 2021. "Nutrient load compensation as a means of maintaining the good ecological status of surface waters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:eaa132:139491. 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/eaaeeea.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.