IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/jrp/jrpwrp/2010-026.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Agri-Environmental Schemes and Grassland Biodiversity: Another Side of the Coin

Author

Listed:
  • Angela Münch

    (School of Economics and Business Administration, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena)

Abstract

In this paper part of the existing Agri-Environmental Schemes (AES) of the European Union are evaluated by using data on county level instead of applying field studies. The attempt is made to disentangle the effects of AES on land management practice as well as land use on biodiversity. It is argued that subsidies as AES should promote environmental-friendly land use which, in turn, should lead to biodiversity conservation. First results show that AES promotes ecological land use rather than extensive agricultural practice. Furthermore, AES is predominantly allocated in biodiversity rich counties and not in counties with low biodiversity which should be enhanced. Furthermore, no clear evidence is so far found, that land use practice is improving the biodiversity status.

Suggested Citation

  • Angela Münch, 2010. "Agri-Environmental Schemes and Grassland Biodiversity: Another Side of the Coin," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-026, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    • Handle: RePEc:jrp:jrpwrp:2010-026
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://oweb.b67.uni-jena.de/Papers/jerp2010/wp_2010_026.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Parker, Dawn C. & Munroe, Darla K., 2007. "The geography of market failure: Edge-effect externalities and the location and production patterns of organic farming," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 821-833, February.
    2. Baylis, Kathy & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon & Simon, Leo, 2008. "Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: A comparison," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 753-764, May.
    3. Eichner, Thomas & Pethig, Rudiger, 2006. "Economic land use, ecosystem services and microfounded species dynamics," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 707-720, November.
    4. Andreas Freytag & C. Vietze & W. Völkl, 2011. "What Drives Biodiversity? An Empirical Assessment of the Relation between Biodiversity and the Economy," Jena Economics Research Papers 2009-025, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    5. Hanley, Nick & Shogren, Jason & White, Ben, 2013. "Introduction to Environmental Economics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199568734.
    6. Luc Anselin, 2001. "Spatial Effects in Econometric Practice in Environmental and Resource Economics," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(3), pages 705-710.
    7. Martin L. Weitzman, 1998. "The Noah's Ark Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(6), pages 1279-1298, November.
    8. H. Scott Gordon, 1954. "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Chennat Gopalakrishnan (ed.), Classic Papers in Natural Resource Economics, chapter 9, pages 178-203, Palgrave Macmillan.
    9. Hynes, Stephen & Farrelly, Niall & Murphy, Eithne & O'Donoghue, Cathal, 2008. "Modelling habitat conservation and participation in agri-environmental schemes: A spatial microsimulation approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 258-269, June.
    10. Dale, Virginia H. & Polasky, Stephen, 2007. "Measures of the effects of agricultural practices on ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 286-296, December.
    11. John Asafu‐Adjaye, 2003. "Biodiversity Loss and Economic Growth: A Cross‐Country Analysis," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 21(2), pages 173-185, April.
    12. Andrew Metrick & Martin L. Weitzman, 1998. "Conflicts and Choices in Biodiversity Preservation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 21-34, Summer.
    13. David Kleijn & Frank Berendse & Ruben Smit & Niels Gilissen, 2001. "Agri-environment schemes do not effectively protect biodiversity in Dutch agricultural landscapes," Nature, Nature, vol. 413(6857), pages 723-725, October.
    14. H. Scott Gordon, 1954. "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(2), pages 124-124.
    15. R. Rawls & David Laband, 2004. "A Public Choice Analysis of Endangered Species Listings," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 121(3), pages 263-277, December.
    16. Roberto Rigobon & Dani Rodrik, 2005. "Rule of law, democracy, openness, and income," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 13(3), pages 533-564, July.
    17. Venkatachalam, L., 2008. "Behavioral economics for environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 640-645, November.
    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. Andreas Freytag & Christoph Vietze, 2013. "Can nature promote development? The role of sustainable tourism for economic growth," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 16-44, March.
    2. 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.
    3. Ariane Amin & Johanna Choumert, 2015. "Development and biodiversity conservation in Sub-Saharan Africa: A spatial analysis," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(1), pages 729-744.
    4. Ariane Manuela Amin, 2012. "What Drives Biodiversity Conservation Effort in the Developing World? An analysis for Sub-Saharan Africa," CERDI Working papers halshs-00722081, HAL.
    5. Ariane Manuela AMIN, 2012. "What Drives Biodiversity Conservation Effort in the Developing World? An analysis for Sub-Saharan Africa," Working Papers 201230, CERDI.
    6. Eichner, Thomas & Pethig, Rudiger, 2006. "Economic land use, ecosystem services and microfounded species dynamics," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 707-720, November.
    7. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    8. Coxhead, Ian A. & Jayasuriya, Sisira, 2003. "Trade, Liberalization, Resource Degradation and Industrial Pollution in Developing Countries: An Integrated Analysis," Staff Papers 12691, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    9. Rauscher, Michael, 1996. "Sustainable Development and Complex Ecosystems. An Economist's View," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 02, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    10. Barkley Rosser, J. Jr., 2001. "Complex ecologic-economic dynamics and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 23-37, April.
    11. Jorge Higinio Maldonado & Rocío del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Exacerbating the Tragedy of the Commons: Private Inefficient Outcomes and Peer Effect in Experimental Games with Fishing Communities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, February.
    12. Strydom, M.B. & Nieuwoudt, W. Lieb, 1998. "An Economic Analysis Of Restructuring The South African Hake Quota Market," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 37(3), pages 1-15, September.
    13. repec:mse:cesdoc:13002r is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Horan, R.D. & Bulte, E.H., 2004. "Optimal and open access harvesting and multi-use species in a second best world," Other publications TiSEM 95000e50-7225-4f4d-aeaf-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Funk, Matt, 2008. "On the Problem of Sustainable Economic Development: A Theoretical Solution to this Prisoner's Dilemma," MPRA Paper 19025, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 08 Jun 2008.
    16. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    17. Catherine J. Morrison Paul & Ronald G. Felthoven & Marcelo de O. Torres, 2010. "Productive performance in fisheries: modeling, measurement, and management," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(3), pages 343-360, July.
    18. Davis, Katrina & Pannell, David J. & Kragt, Marit & Gelcich, Stefan & Schilizzi, Steven, 2014. "Accounting for enforcement is essential to improve the spatial allocation of marine restricted-use zoning systems," Working Papers 195718, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    19. Lee, Kun C. & Short, Cameron & Heady, Earl O., 1981. "Optimal Groundwater Mining In The Ogallala Aquifer: Estimation Of Economic Losses And Excessive Depletion Due To Commonality," 1981 Annual Meeting, July 26-29, Clemson, South Carolina 279261, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Marco Casari, 2002. "Can genetic algorithms explain experimental anomalies? An application to common property resources," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 542.02, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    21. van Dijk, Diana & Hendrix, Eligius M.T. & Haijema, Rene & Groeneveld, Rolf A. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2014. "On solving a bi-level stochastic dynamic programming model for analyzing fisheries policies: Fishermen behavior and optimal fish quota," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 272(C), pages 68-75.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    AES effectiveness; biodiversity; policy evaluation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • R14 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Land Use Patterns

    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:jrp:jrpwrp:2010-026. 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: Markus Pasche (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.jenecon.de .

    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.