IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/agraaa/130-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating the environmental impact of agricultural policies

Author

Listed:
  • Ben Henderson

    (OECD)

  • Jussi Lankoski

    (OECD)

Abstract

The relationship between agricultural support policies (adapted from the OECD Producer Support Estimate (PSE) classification) and a selection of environmental impacts are analysed in a range of country settings, using a farm-level and a market-level model. Based on the methods and environmental indicators used, market price support and payments based on unconstrained variable input use were the most environmentally harmful among the various PSE measures. Decoupled support payments based on non-current crop area were the least harmful, even when considering their impacts on the behaviour of risk averse farmers. The impacts of support policies that clearly change the competitiveness of one production activity in relation to another, such as payments based on current crop area or on animal numbers, were more equivocal. Support payments subject to environmental constraints can improve environmental outcomes compared to coupled support without restrictions, however, they can also have unintended environmental impacts.

Suggested Citation

  • Ben Henderson & Jussi Lankoski, 2019. "Evaluating the environmental impact of agricultural policies," OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 130, OECD Publishing.
    • Handle: RePEc:oec:agraaa:130-en
    DOI: 10.1787/add0f27c-en
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/add0f27c-en
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/add0f27c-en?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Stefano Ciliberti & Luca Palazzoni & Sofia Maria Lilli & Angelo Frascarelli, 2022. "Direct Payments to Provide Environmental Public Goods and Enhance Farm Incomes: Do Allocation Criteria Matter?," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 13(1-2).
    2. Gwen DeBoe & Koen Deconinck & Ben Henderson & Jussi Lankoski, 2020. "Reforming Agricultural Policies Will Help to Improve Environmental Performance," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 19(1), pages 30-35, April.
    3. Jonathan Brooks, 2023. "Agricultural policies and food systems: Priorities for indicator development," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(1), pages 3-23, February.
    4. Astrida Miceikienė & Kristina Gesevičienė & Daiva Rimkuvienė, 2021. "Assessment of the Dependence of GHG Emissions on the Support and Taxes in the EU Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-15, July.
    5. Jonathan Brooks & Céline Giner, 2021. "What Role Can Agricultural Policies Play in Encouraging Healthier Diets?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 20(3), pages 4-11, December.
    6. Benjamin Henderson & Jussi Lankoski, 2021. "Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Agricultural Policies," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(4), pages 1487-1502, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    biodiversity; GHG; nitrogen runoff; nutrient balance; producer support;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare 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:oec:agraaa:130-en. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tdoecfr.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.