A grassland strategy for farming systems in Europe to mitigate GHG emissions—An integrated spatially differentiated modelling approach

This paper assesses the impact of an EU-wide policy to expand grassland areas and promote carbon sequestration in soils. We use the economic Common Agricultural Policy Regionalized Impact (CAPRI) model, which represents EU agriculture using 2450 mathematical programming farm-type models in combination with the biogeochemistry CENTURY model, which provides carbon sequestration rates at a high resolution level. Both models are linked at the NUTS3 level using location information from the Farm Accounting Data Network. We simulated a flexible grassland premium such that farmers voluntary and cost efficiently increase grassland area by 5%. We find that the GHG mitigation potential and the costs depend on carbon sequestration rates, land markets and induced land use changes, and regional agricultural production structures. In Europe, the calculated net effect of converting 2.9 Mha into grassland is a reduction of 4.3 Mt CO2e (equivalents). The premium amounts to an average of EUR 238/ha, with a total cost of EUR 417 million for the whole EU. The net abatement costs are based on the premium payments, and account on average EUR 97/t CO2e. However, substantial carbon sequestration (28% of total sequestration) can be achieved at a rate of EUR 50/t CO2e. Carbon sequestration would be most effective in regions of France and Italy and in Spain, the Netherlands and Germany. Larger farms and farm-types specialized in ‘cereals and protein crops’, ‘mixed field cropping’ and ‘mixed crop-livestock’ farming systems have the highest mitigation potential at relatively low costs.     

An open-access method for targeting revegetation based on potential for emissions reduction,carbon sequestration and opportunity cost

We propose a simple heuristic that uses open-access models and government data on agricultural activities to estimate total carbon emissions from agriculture, the gross carbon benefit and the opportunity cost per tonne CO₂-e from revegetating to environmental plantings or plantation forestry. We test this across ten areas of mixed land-use that represent diverse Australian agricultural systems along a rainfall transect. The local value of agricultural production was obtained from government statistics and used to estimate the current economic opportunity cost of converting cleared agricultural land to mixed environmental plantings for carbon sequestration. Gross carbon benefit from revegetation was closely related to current agricultural use, as was financial opportunity cost. These were not related simply to site productivity potential or rainfall. The proportion of land cleared for agriculture that would need to be re-vegetated to achieve a localised zero-carbon land-use scenario was calculated by the ratio of current agricultural emissions to gross carbon benefit from revegetation; this ranged from 13% to 66% for groups of agricultural industries across Australian rainfall transects. While the heuristic does not capture the detail of models built specifically for local research questions it does provide a different lens on the questions policy makers and land managers may ask about the costs and benefits of revegetating agricultural land, and provides open-access methods to guide them.     

Carbon-accounting methods and reforestation incentives

The emission of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, and the consequent potential for climate change are the focus of increasing international concern. Temporary land-use change and forestry projects (LUCF) can be implemented to offset permanent emissions of carbon dioxide from the energy sector. Several approaches to accounting for carbon sequestration in LUCF projects have been proposed. In the present paper, the economic implications of adopting four of these approaches are evaluated in a normative context. The analysis is based on simulation of Australian farm–forestry systems. Results are interpreted from the standpoint of both investors and landholders. The role of baselines and transaction costs are discussed.     

The influence of crediting and permanence periods on Australian forest-based carbon offset supply

Governments globally are developing increasingly ambitious carbon emissions reduction schemes that include significant emissions offset credits for forest-based carbon sequestration. Such strategies can present significant challenges in highly modified and intensively farmed regions where forest land use opportunity and establishment costs are high. This article evaluates the economics of land-use change via active afforestation for local carbon abatement in the Australian state of South Australia, a region with high supply costs representative of long-established temperate farming regions. We found that there is no economically viable abatement below $38 tCO₂e⁻¹, however up to 154 Mt CO₂e of abatement could be available up to prices of $50 tCO₂e⁻¹.Variation in current Australian Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) policy parameters related to permanence and crediting periods were also assessed. Recent ERF contracts involve a 100-year land-use change commitment (permanence period) and a 25-year crediting period where payments for growth in carbon from the land-use change is contracted. We compared outcomes of this arrangement to a scenario with equal 100-year permanence and crediting periods. We found substantial differences in carbon supply at some price points for a 25 rather than a 100-year crediting period. Under ERF parameters the first economically viable revegetation options occur at $42 tCO₂e⁻¹, however, we found a 69 percent reduction in economically viable supply at a carbon price of $50 tCO₂e⁻¹. The results highlight the role offset crediting policy can have on dis-incentivising land-use change and the need for landholders to be compensated fully for temporal opportunity costs.     

Economic evaluation of ecosystem goods and services under different landscape management scenarios

Human-induced changes in the natural environment are affecting the provision of ecosystem goods and services (EGS). Land use plans rarely include the value of public ecosystem services such as climate regulation and biodiversity due to difficulties in valuing these services. In this study, we assessed total economic value for five important ecosystem goods and services under five future land-use scenarios using varying levels of costs, prices and discount rates. Results indicated that at higher discount rates normally applied to commercial activities, and assuming the current prices for goods and services, net present value (NPV) was highest for landscape management scenarios aimed at maximising agricultural production. Potential income from services such as carbon and biodiversity does not offset projected income lost from agriculture due to land-use changes. At higher discount rates, NPV was negative for the two scenarios aimed at enhancing the longer term ecological sustainability of the landscape. These results indicate that income from carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation would need to be considerably higher than current levels in order to justify focusing management of this landscape on ecological outcomes. At lower discount rates (at levels normally associated with public investments), the more ecologically appropriate ‘mosaic farming system’ had the highest NPV, indicating that this type of system might be attractive for investors interested in longer term return horizons or wider public benefits. Higher income from carbon or biodiversity, or increased return from timber by using high value tree species, could potentially make more ecologically appropriate systems profitable at higher discount rates.     

二叉树期权定价模式评估林业碳汇项目的价值

基于黑龙江省林业局和中国林业统计年鉴的数据,运用修正的Faustmann模型和二叉树期权定价方法分析黑龙江省黑河造林林区的碳汇价值及该项目的经济可行性。研究结果表明:经营成本负向影响项目的最终价值;碳汇价格和木材价格正向影响项目的最终价值;初始价值正向影响项目的最终价值;黑龙江省黑河造林林区项目具有较高的经济效益和生态效益。因此,相关部门应建立完善的碳汇交易市场,实施激励措施和制定林地产权制度。     

基于情景分析的烟草种植替代综合效应研究

[目的]烟草种植替代是从源头控制烟草消费的最有效措施,但在我国还未全面实施。文章分析研究不同情境下烟草种植替代可能产生的综合效应,以期推动我国烟草种植替代的实施。[方法]基于2018年湖北省利川市11种作物的成本收益、化肥使用量等数据,利用情景分析法,结合环境风险指数法和综合评价法对烟草种植替代可能产生的综合效应进行分析。[结果]（1）种植烟草高昂的人工成本使得其净利润为负,且在11种作物中最低,其现金收益仅高于粮食与油料作物,种植番茄或黄瓜的现金收益分别比烟草高7倍和6倍,烟草较高的价格可能是吸引农户种植的主要原因之一;（2）情景1种植烟草的氮肥使用环境风险较低,磷肥与钾肥使用的环境风险等级较高;情景2种植粮食作物可以减少化肥使用的环境风险,种植蔬菜等作物会增加化肥使用的环境风险;（3）在该文的3种情景中,粮食作物的固碳能力较强,经济作物的固碳能力较弱;种植烟草的固碳能力最弱,其综合效应仅优于油菜籽与烟草的组合,远低于种植蔬菜或烟草与蔬菜作物组合种植的综合效应。[结论]利川市可以选择番茄、黄瓜等蔬菜作物或是这些作物与烟草共同种植的方案来代替烟草种植,在履行《烟草控制框架公约》的同时能...     

Assessing policy and carbon price settings for incentivising reforestation activities in a carbon market: An Australian perspective

Policy makers often seek to incentivise reforestation to achieve either carbon abatement and/or the provision of other co-benefits such as landscape remediation, biodiversity, and social outcomes. But where incentives are for carbon abatement alone, uptake is often slower than expected, with previous estimates of economic viability for reforestation often overlooking some economic and technical barriers. Management of revegetation projects (e.g. species mix, configuration in belts or blocks and density of stocking) influences not only rates of sequestration of carbon (and therefore expected revenue from carbon markets), but also establishment and maintenance costs. These management factors were considered via a sensitivity analysis of a financial cash flow model of different scenarios of revegetation projects with respect to scale of operation of projects, quantification methodology applied, and type of payment contract.Results reinforced that policy makers seeking to incentivise revegetation for carbon abatement in addition to co-benefits such as landscape remediation may require additional crediting for these co-benefits as projects are often unviable with carbon payments alone. For example, simple linear tree plantings are likely to be most competitive in a market based solely on carbon abatement, while blocks of mixed-species biodiversity plantings would be uncompetitive given their relatively low rates of carbon sequestration and high establishment costs. Economic viability of revegetation projects may also be enhanced through: aggregation of projects to increase economies of scale; carbon markets allowing flexibility in approaches for quantification (e.g. application of calibrated models, or undertaking of direct field sampling), and; facilitating payment contracts that provide upfront capital through forward contracts.     

Can carbon-trading schemes help to protect China's most diverse forest ecosystems? A case study from Xishuangbanna,Yunnan

Xishuangbanna has been largely transformed from biodiverse natural forests and mixed-use farms into monoculture rubber plantations in just twenty years. This conversion has expanded into forests previously protected by the community and onto marginal sites at high-elevation. Market-based ecosystem payments, especially carbon financing, are potential tools to prevent further forest loss in China. Here, we compare rubber net present value (NPV), carbon sequestration, and seed-plant species diversity for Xishuangbanna given three land-use scenarios: Business-As-Usual (BAU), Economic Oriented Scenario (EOS) and Conservation Oriented Scenario (COS) using a previously published spatial map of rubber profitability. The EOS achieved the greatest rubber profit but caused substantial reductions in natural forest area, biodiversity and carbon stocks. The EOS also requires substantial immigration of workers into a remote and ecologically important region with little social infrastructure for basic security, food security, health-care and education, causing frequently ignored costs. As expected, the COS will maintain the highest levels of natural forest area, sequester 57% more carbon, and 71% more biodiversity than EOS. Given the conservation value of the carbon stores and rich biodiversity residing in Xishuangbanna's natural forests, reducing rubber NPV only marginally would probably cost less than attempting to recover these resources. We recommend that rubber plantations be limited to established, productive lowland areas whilst protecting intact high-elevation forest and reforesting low-productivity plantations. These actions will enhance carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation. Management policies focused solely on profits, like the EOS scenario, will fail to sustain the entire range of natural resources and ecosystem services. The prices in the carbon market would have to be considerably larger than they are currently to compete with the profitability of rubber.     

The impact of climate and price risks on agricultural land use and crop management decisions

This article aims to investigate the impacts of climate change and of lower and more volatile crop price levels as currently observed in the European Union (EU) on optimal management decisions, average income and income risks in crop production in Western Switzerland. To this end, a bioeconomic whole-farm model has been developed that non-parametrically combines the crop growth model CropSyst with an economic decision model using a genetic algorithm. The analysis focuses on the farm level, which enables us to integrate a wide set of potential adaptation responses, comprising changes in agricultural land use as well as crop-specific fertilization and irrigation strategies. Furthermore, the farmer's certainty equivalent is employed as objective function, which enables the consideration of not only impacts on average income but also impacts on income variability.The study shows that that the effects of EU crop prices on the optimal management decisions as well as on the farmer's certainty equivalent are much stronger than the effects of climate change. Furthermore, our results indicate that the impacts of income risks on the crop farm's optimal management schemes are of rather low importance. This is due to two major reasons: first, direct payments make up a large percentage of the agricultural income in Switzerland which makes Swiss farmers less vulnerable to market and climate volatility. Second, arable crop farms in Switzerland have by law to cultivate at least four different crops. Due to these diverse cropping systems and high government direct payments risk does neither under climate change, market liberalization nor combinations thereof, play a very decisive role in arable farming in Switzerland.     

森林碳汇项目有助于减贫吗?

基于2005—2014年大兴安岭图强林业局碳汇造林项目的项目地潮河林场、奋斗林场、二十八站林场和育英林场的数据,建立结构方程模型对森林碳汇项目促进减贫的影响因素及其之间的关系进行实证分析。结果表明:森林碳汇项目通过促进社会就业情况和经济情况有助于减缓贫困,并且社会就业情况在减贫影响上比经济状况贡献度高;而森林碳汇项目造林阶段的造林面积对减缓贫困在一定程度上呈正相关关系。通过结果分析表明只有基于内生发展动力和贫困人口的自我发展能力的森林碳汇项目开发设计,由"输血型"模式变为"造血型"模式,才能更好地实现应对气候变化和缓解贫困两个目标。     

Welfare implications of reduced government subsidies to farm families: accounting for fringe benefits

In the past three decades, farm families have relied on government payments and off‐farm income to reduce income risk and increase total household income. Studies have shown that, as the income effect dominates, government payments tend to reduce off‐farm labor of farm operators and spouses. But that may not be true if one accounts for fringe benefits associated with off‐farm employment. Additionally, with looming budget deficits and the possibility of a reduction in decoupled government payments, farm families may be facing an altered economic environment. Our study addresses this issue by examining the links between government farm program payments and the ever‐important role of fringe benefits in the off‐farm employment of farm couples. Results from farm‐level data actually show that the marginal effect of government payments on hours worked off‐farm will decrease in magnitude when accounting for fringe benefits, ceteris paribus. These results support the notion that farm households’ welfare loss stemming from reduced decoupled payments may be overstated when models exclude fringe benefits from the estimation of off‐farm labor supply.     

US farm support under a Biden administration: Plus ça change,plus c'est la même chose?

During the Trump administration, there has been an unprecedented increase in the level of domestic support provided to US agricultural producers. Direct farm supports, including price and income support payments, federal crop insurance, and supplemental assistance to compensate losses due to the trade war with China and the pandemic, have accounted for more than one‐third of net farm income. Those payments have threatened to push the United States over its World Trade Organization (WTO) domestic support obligations and increased its vulnerability to potential dispute settlement challenges in the WTO. The incoming Biden administration will likely bring a new focus to repurpose farm subsidies to provide environmental benefits, such as reduced greenhouse gas emissions, but to achieve those reforms they will need to convince a US Congress that has historically been prone to maintaining the status quo.     

Abstracts of Award-Winning Theses

This thesis determines the tradeoff between producer welfare and the provision of environmental benefits, through reduced soil erosion and fertilizer applications, on agricultural working land. A land-use allocation model of two Iowa counties is formulated as a mathematical programming problem, building upon the Takayama and Judge framework. Slope is used to reflect terrain heterogeneity, such that the spatial allocation of land-use practices impacts economic and environmental outcomes via a yield damage function and differentiated rates of soil erosion. The model differs from prior empirical models in that it includes both crop and livestock production, which gives the model the flexibility to choose whether the two activities are optimally nonseparable.
Price policy analysis indicates that the land use allocation is relatively insensitive to changes in commodity prices, i.e., altering commodity-based support payments is insufficient to attain environmental improvements. Several "green" policy instruments are simulated to estimate the cost to producers of reducing environmental damages. Limiting soil erosion with either a regulatory standard or a per unit tax reduces the average return to land by 10%. Shifting current income support payments into a system of payments for conservation land management practices, similar in essence to the Conservation Security Program, cannot attain the same soil erosion reduction with less cost to producers. Overall, the inelastic response of land use practices to commodity prices indicates that targeting the use of productive inputs, as opposed to commodity outputs, may be a more efficient means of attaining environmental improvements.     

Soil Carbon Sequestration Strategies with Alternative Tillage and Nitrogen Sources under Risk

This study examines the economic potential of using either no-tillage or conventional tillage with either commercial nitrogen or cattle manure to sequester soil in continuous corn production. This research uses stochastic efficiency with respect to a function to determine the preferred production systems under various risk preferences and utility-weighted certainty equivalent risk premiums to determine the carbon credit values needed to motivate adoption of systems, which sequester higher levels of carbon. The results indicate that no-tillage and cattle manure increase carbon sequestration. Carbon credits or government program incentives are not required to entice risk-averse managers to use no-tillage, but are required to encourage manure use as a means of sequestering additional carbon even at historically high nitrogen prices. New environmental rules for confined animal feeding operations may increase the demand for land to apply manure as a primary nutrient source and participation in the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, Conservation Security Program, and a carbon credit market to obtain payments to offset some or all of the costs of manure application.     

Paying for ecological services in Ecuador: The political economy of structural inequality

Paying Indigenous communities to conserve land for carbon sequestration is a controversial way of tackling climate change. Critics argue that paying for ecological services (or ‘PES’) in the form of carbon offset programmes reduces land and social relations to an economic transaction that devalues Indigenous livelihoods and communities. At the same time, empirical studies have shown that Indigenous communities have accepted and even embraced the idea of being paid to conserve land for climate change mitigation. This paper explores this apparent contradiction by investigating the implementation of Programa Socio Bosque (PSB), a PES carbon sequestration programme in Ecuador. Drawing upon primary fieldwork in the highland province of Chimborazo, it makes the case that PES programmes need to be understood as form of state power that reconfigures and reinforces the ways in which Indigenous peoples engage with the state. Particularly important in this regard is the role of the state in reinforcing the agrarian conditions under which Indigenous communities use and interpret PES payments while at the same time reconfiguring new forms of land conservation. Empirically, the research reveals important complementarities between the goals of carbon sequestration PES programmes and Indigenous land-use practices. Methodologically, it highlights the importance of situating the study of PES programmes in a context of land struggles, community–state relations and agrarian change.     

森林碳汇价值与农户林业收入增长的分析

根据福建省顺昌县农户林业收入的调查数据,从林产品收入、林业服务性收入、林地地租收入、生态公益林补偿收入、其他涉林收入等方面对农户林业收入构成进行分析,发现森林生态效益在农户林业收入中的贡献非常小,仅占0.18%;以现有碳汇市场为参考,通过森林蓄积量换算因子法估算出该县的森林碳汇量及其碳汇价值,指出森林碳汇价值的实现可以有效地增加农户林业生态收入、改善农户的林业收入结构;并探讨了农户森林碳汇价值实现的途径。     

陕西省主要粮食作物生产成本收益研究——以小麦、玉米为例

陕西省是我国的农业大省,粮食作物的生产成本和收益与农民收入直接相关,对农村经济的可持续发展具有重要影响。文章分析了陕西省主要粮食作物的种植现状,以小麦、玉米为例探究了主要粮食作物的生产成本收益,并对生产中存在的问题及潜力进行了详细分析,结果表明,尽管实施了多项惠农政策,粮食作物生产仍表现为成本高,收益低,农民播种积极性不高;粮食生产面临形势严峻,但陕西省粮食生产有很大的潜力可以挖掘。该文还提出了提高农民耕种积极性、提高粮食作物单产水平、实现农业产业化等对策建议,以期为提高粮食作物产量和品质,提高生产成本收益提供一定依据。     

Analysing foregone costs of communities and carbon benefits in small scale community based forestry practice in Nepal

Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, conservation and sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon (REDD+) are considered to be important cost effective approaches for global climate change mitigation; therefore, such practices are evolving as the REDD+ payment mechanism in developing countries. Using six years (2006–2012) data, this paper analyses trade-offs between carbon stock gains and the costs incurred by communities in generating additional carbon in 105 REDD+ pilot community forests in Nepal. It estimates foregone benefits for communities engaged in increasing carbon stocks in various dominant vegetation types. At recent carbon and commodity prices, communities receive on average US$ 0.47/ha/year of carbon benefits with the additional cost of US$ 67.30/ha/year. One dollar’s worth of community cost resulted 0.23 Mg of carbon sequestration. Therefore, carbon payment alone may not be an attractive incentive within small-scale community forestry and should link with payments for ecosystem services. Moreover, the study found highest community sacrificed benefits in Shorea mixed broadleaf forests and lowest in Schima-Castanopsis forests, while carbon benefits were highest in Pine forests followed by Schima-Castanopsis forests and lowest in Rhododendron-Quercus forests. This indicates that costs and benefits may vary by vegetation type. A policy should consider payment for other environmental services, carbon gains, co-benefits and trade off while designing the REDD+ mechanism in community based forest land use practice with equitable community outcomes. The learning from this study will help in the formulation of an appropriate REDD+ policy for community forestry.     

Cash cropping and food crop productivity: synergies or trade‐offs?

The case for promoting export‐oriented cash crops in Africa has generally been based on their direct potential contribution to agricultural productivity and small farmer incomes. A relatively neglected avenue of research concerns the synergistic effects that cash cropping can have on other household activities, including food production. The conventional view that cash crops compete with food crops for land and labour neglects the potential for cash crop schemes to make available inputs on credit, management training, and other resources that can contribute to food crop productivity, which might otherwise not be accessible to farmers if they did not participate in cash crop programs. This article builds on previous research by hypothesising key pathways by which cash crops may affect food crop activities and empirically measuring these effects using the case of cotton in Gokwe North District in Zimbabwe. Analysis is based on instrumental variable analysis of survey data on 430 rural households in 1996. Results indicate that—after controlling for household assets, education and locational differences—households engaging intensively in cotton production obtain higher grain yields than non‐cotton and marginal cotton producers. We also find evidence of regional spill‐over effects whereby commercialisation schemes induce second round investments in a particular area that provide benefits to all farmers in that region, regardless of whether they engage in that commercialisation scheme. The study suggests that the potential spill‐over benefits for food crops through participation in cash crop programs are important to consider in the development of strategies designed to intensify African food crop production.