Comparing support for organic and conventional farming in the European Union using an adjusted Producer Support Estimate

This paper compares support for organic and conventional farmingin 2001, using the methodology of the Producer Support Estimate(PSE). Although market price support for organic products isdifficult to determine, our case study-based estimates indicatethat the PSE for organic farming ranged between 41 and 44 percent in the EU, compared with 35 per cent for conventional farming.However, the structure of support for the different commoditiesis similar between organic and conventional farming, althoughdirect payments are generally higher for organic farming. Noclear link between the level of support and the share of organicfarming in Member States could be detected. An annual calculationof separate PSEs for both forms of farming could provide usefulinformation about developments in support.     

The contribution of organic farming to rural development: An exploration of the socio-economic linkages of organic and non-organic farms in England

Organic farming has experienced considerable growth in recent years. Proponents of organic farming point to the environmental and nutritional benefits of organic systems, although these are contested by some. More recently, it has been argued that organic farming can provide rural development benefits through enhanced employment and through closer connections with the local economy, reconnecting consumers with producers and stimulating positive economic multipliers. Against the background of claims made for the rural development potential of organic farming, this paper considers the generation and retention of income, purchasing patterns, and direct employment impacts of a large sample of organic and non-organic farmers in England. The paper reveals some important distinctions between the characteristics of organic and non-organic farms and farmers. It is argued that most of these differences do not stem directly from differences in farming systems but, rather, reflect considerable differences in the people who operate organic farms as well as the distinctive business configurations they frequently adopt.     

Risk and risk management in organic and conventional cash crop farming in Norway

This study presents empirical insight into organic and conventional cash crop farmers' perceptions of risk and risk management strategies, and identifies socio-economic variables linked to these perceptions. The data originate from a questionnaire survey of farmers in Norway. The results indicate that organic farmers perceived themselves to be less risk averse than conventional farmers. For both groups, crop prices and yield variability were the two top rated sources of risk, followed by institutional risks. The two groups evaluated risk management strategies quite similarly; favoured strategies were good liquidity and to prevent and reduce crop diseases and pests. The farmers' evaluation of sources of risk and choice of risk strategies depended on various socio-economic variables. The importance of institutional risks implies that policy makers should be cautious about changing policy capriciously and they should consider strategic policy initiatives that give farmers more long-term reliability.     

Comparing risk attitudes of organic and non-organic farmers with a Bayesian random coefficient model

Organic farming is usually considered to be more risky thanconventional farming, but the risk aversion of organic farmerscompared with that of conventional farmers has not been studied.Using a non-structural approach to risk estimation, a Bayesianrandom coefficient model is used to obtain individual Arrow–Prattcoefficients of absolute risk aversion for a sample of Dutchorganic and non-organic arable farmers. The model is estimatedusing Gibbs sampling. The results indicate that organic farmersare significantly less risk averse than their non-organic colleagues.     

Multifunctional peri-urban agriculture—A review of societal demands and the provision of goods and services by farming

Peri-urban areas around urban agglomerations in Europe and elsewhere have been subject to agricultural and land use research for the past three decades. The manner in which farming responds to urban pressures, socio-economic changes and development opportunities has been the main focus of examination, with urban demand for rural goods and services representing a driving factor to adapt farming activities in a multifunctional way. Working within the peri-urban framework, this review pays particular attention to the relevance of multifunctional agriculture. Academic discourses and empirical insights related to farm structure and practices beyond conventional agriculture are analysed. Diversification, recreational and environmental farming, landscape management and specialisation, as well as direct marketing are all taken into consideration and discussed within the context of landscape functions. The provision of rural goods and services is contrasted with societal demands on peri-urban agriculture. This review finds that multifunctional agriculture has been commonly recognised in peri-urban areas – a phenomenon that includes a large variety of activities and diversification approaches within the context of environmental, social and economic functions of agriculture. In response to the post-productive, consumption-oriented requirements of the urban society, peri-urban farmers have intensified their uptake of multifunctional activities. Nevertheless, not all multifunctional opportunities are being fully developed when one considers the large and growing urban demand for goods and services provided by agriculture carried out near the city. This paper discusses policy and planning approaches to support multifunctional agriculture in peri-urban areas.