IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/idb/ovewps/0407.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On-Site Costs and Benefits of Soil Conservation Among Hillside Farmers in El Salvador

Author

Listed:
  • Boris Bravo

    (Office of International Affairs and Department Of Agriculture and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut Storrs,CT,USA.)

  • Horacio Cocchi

    (Office of International Affairs, University of Connecticut, Storrs,CT,USA.)

Abstract

This study analyses the relationships between farm income, adoption of conservation technologies and output diversification among PAES participants by comparing their performance at two points in time, 2002 and 2005, and against non-participants (control group) in 2005. An endogeneity test confirms that conservation adoption and diversification are endogenous. Therefore, the diversification and adoption equations are estimated first and the predicted values of both endogenous variables are used in a second step as additional explanatory variables in the farm income equation where the latter is estimated using the Tobit technique. The Tobit results are then used to generate the net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR) of the soil conservation and agroforestry component of PAES between 1998 and 2005. Crop diversification and soil conservation practices exhibit a strong positive association with the length of farmers’ involvement with PAES and their participation in social organizations. Soil conservation practices and crop diversification, measured by an entropy index, significantly increase farm income, which highlights the strategic role of diversification in fighting rural poverty. The positive association between conservation practices and income contrasts with the effects of conservation structures, which is negative but non-significant. A substantial body of literature increasingly recognizes that structures are expensive to build and maintain whereas they add little to the land productivity in the short run. Such drawbacks may clearly affect the profitability of these conservation technologies.Then we compare cost and benefit figures over the life-span of PAES (1998-2005) to compute the IRR and NPV. Average income gains per family per year amount to $280, while the NPV is $13,674,100 at a 12% discount rate with an IRR of 48.45%. These indicators clearly reveal that the soil conservation and agroforestry component of PAES has been highly profitable, which is in line with similar evaluations of natural resource management programs in Central America and elsewhere. Finally, the estimates of NPV and IRR are robust, according to diverse scenarios generated using bootstrapping and sensitivity analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Boris Bravo & Horacio Cocchi, 2007. "On-Site Costs and Benefits of Soil Conservation Among Hillside Farmers in El Salvador," OVE Working Papers 0407, Inter-American Development Bank, Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE).
  • Handle: RePEc:idb:ovewps:0407
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://idbdocs.iadb.org/WSDocs/getdocument.aspx?docnum=1326741&Cache=True
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. De los Santos-Montero, Luis A. & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E., 2017. "Natural Resource Management and Household Well-being: The Case of POSAF-II in Nicaragua," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 42-59.
    2. Maredia, Mywish K., 2009. "Improving the proof: Evolution of and emerging trends in impact assessment methods and approaches in agricultural development," IFPRI discussion papers 929, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Mirzabaev, A. & Strokov, A. & Krasilnikov, P., 2018. "The impact of land degradation on agricultural profits and poverty in Central Asia," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277449, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Sain, Gustavo & Loboguerrero, Ana María & Corner-Dolloff, Caitlin & Lizarazo, Miguel & Nowak, Andreea & Martínez-Barón, Deissy & Andrieu, Nadine, 2017. "Costs and benefits of climate-smart agriculture: The case of the Dry Corridor in Guatemala," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 163-173.
    5. Randall Blair & Kenneth Fortson & Joanne Lee & Anu Rangarajan, "undated". "Should Foreign Aid Fund Agricultural Training? Evidence from Armenia," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 74d16d1a54bd430eb39d64979, Mathematica Policy Research.
    6. Luis A. De los Santos‐Montero & Boris E. Bravo‐Ureta, 2017. "Productivity effects and natural resource management: econometric evidence from POSAF‐II in Nicaragua," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(4), pages 220-233, November.
    7. repec:mpr:mprres:7879 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. De los Santos, Luis Alberto & Bravo-Ureta, Boris Eduardo & Cramon-Taubadel, Stephan, 2017. "Are Natural Resource Management Programs Beneficial? Evidence from the POSAF-II case in Nicaragua," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 261282, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    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:idb:ovewps:0407. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Felipe Herrera Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iadbbus.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.