Document Detail


Spatial targeting of agri-environmental measures: cost-effectiveness and distributional consequences.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  20614120     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
Agri-environmental measures are payments to farmers to reduce environmental risks or to preserve cultivated landscapes. These measures are codified in European Union regulations. Poor spatial targeting is one of the major causes of low cost-effectiveness in agri-environmental measures. Existing studies on spatial targeting focus primarily on selected individual measures; hence, they do not allow for conclusions at the program level, where the planning and implementing of decisions on a number of different measures has to be made. In this study, we analyzed the impacts of two spatial targeting options (targeting of erosion-reducing measures on erosion vulnerable areas; targeting of grassland extensification on N-pollution vulnerable areas) on the cost-effectiveness of the single measures and the entire agri-environmental program of the federal state of Brandenburg in Germany. The methodological steps included an analysis of empirical data on land use and program participation, an expert-based environmental impact assessment and a spatial allocation procedure based on linear programming. The environmental impact assessment delivered goal-specific index values for each measures-land parcel combination expressing the suitability of the measures for contributing to four regionally relevant program objectives. The cost-effectiveness of the measures and the program were calculated by putting budgetary costs in relation to the achieved environmental index sum. The calculated cost-effectiveness of the program in 2006 was 89.6% of the simulated optimal cost-effectiveness. The spatial targeting of erosion-reducing measures on erosion vulnerable areas caused an increase in the cost-effectiveness at the measures level and almost no changes at the program level. The spatial targeting of grassland extensification on N-pollution vulnerable areas, despite also improving the cost-effectiveness of this measure, had negative effects on the cost-effectiveness of the program.
Authors:
Sandra Uthes; Bettina Matzdorf; Klaus Müller; Harald Kaechele
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't     Date:  2010-07-08
Journal Detail:
Title:  Environmental management     Volume:  46     ISSN:  1432-1009     ISO Abbreviation:  Environ Manage     Publication Date:  2010 Sep 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2010-09-20     Completed Date:  2011-01-11     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7703893     Medline TA:  Environ Manage     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  494-509     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
Institute of Socioeconomics, Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Müncheberg, Germany. uthes@zalf.de
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Agriculture*
Conservation of Natural Resources / economics,  methods*
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Ecosystem*
Environmental Monitoring / methods*
Models, Theoretical
Soil
Water
Chemical
Reg. No./Substance:
0/Soil; 7732-18-5/Water

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  The weakness of tight ties: why scientists almost destroyed the Coachella Valley multispecies habita...
Next Document:  Mechanism-based pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model for troxacitabine-induced neutropenia in cance...