...
首页> 外文期刊>Cahiers Agricultures >Can rice farmers pay irrigation costsAn investigation of irrigation supply costs and use value in a case study scheme in Thailand
【24h】

Can rice farmers pay irrigation costsAn investigation of irrigation supply costs and use value in a case study scheme in Thailand

机译:稻农可以支付灌溉费用吗?在泰国的一项案例研究计划中对灌溉供应成本和使用价值的调查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Thailand is spending massive budgets in development and maintenance of irrigation systems for rice production. Along with tighter budgets and the ever-decreasing weight of agriculture in the domestic economy, debates are becoming more intense on the need for alternative, internalized modes of financing irrigation water supply, including farmer-targeted charging systems. This article investigates the correlation between the use value of irrigation water and the costs incurred by water supply, on a case study basis, in order to assess the feasibility of charging farmers for such costs. Climatic and production uncertainty was subject to sensitivity analysis (Monte Carlo). Analyses show that the use value (0.35THB/m3 [1 Thai Baht = 0.03 US$1) exceeds total costs (0.1 THB/m3), meaning that farmers could theoretically pay for irrigation water supply. However, results were obtained under favourable production conditions. Furthermore, if farmers were to cover the total cost of irrigation, including capitalcosts (2,208 THB/ha/season), production costs would then increase by approximately 36% in both seasons. Also, farmers would lose approximately 36% of their net income as water charge in the wet season and 25% in the dry season. If farmers were to pay for operation and maintenance costs only (1,403 THB/ ha in both seasons), production costs would then increase by approximately 23%. In view of their low income, charging farmers is not feasible or acceptable. Besides, the study notes that farmers alreadypay pumping costs at field level, and are well aware of the value of water. This article further discusses alternative charging options, on a broader basis. A charging system spread throughout the rice chain, down to milling, retail, and export segments,proves to be acceptable; it may even include farmers, at low cost for them, and reinstate their status and active participation in the chain. The article also suggests that a broader ecosystem services approach may be used.
机译:泰国在发展和维护用于水稻生产的灌溉系统上花费了大量预算。随着预算紧缩以及农业在国内经济中的比重不断下降,关于对灌溉水供应的替代性,内部化模式的需求(包括以农民为目标的收费系统)的争论变得越来越激烈。本文以案例研究为基础,研究了灌溉用水的使用价值与供水成本之间的相关性,以评估向农民收取此类费用的可行性。气候和生产不确定性需进行敏感性分析(蒙特卡洛)。分析表明,使用价值(0.35泰铢/立方米[1泰铢= 0.03美元1]超过了总成本(0.1泰铢/立方米),这意味着农民可以从理论上支付灌溉用水的费用。但是,在有利的生产条件下获得了结果。此外,如果农民要负担总的灌溉成本,包括资本成本(每公顷2208泰铢/季节),则两个季节的生产成本将增加约36%。另外,在雨季农民将损失大约36%的净收入作为水费,而在旱季将损失25%的净收入。如果农民仅需支付运营和维护成本(两个季节均为每公顷1,403泰铢/公顷),那么生产成本将增加约23%。考虑到他们的低收入,向农民收费是不可行或不可接受的。此外,研究指出,农民已经支付了田间的抽水费用,并且非常了解水的价值。本文将在更广泛的基础上进一步讨论其他收费选项。事实证明可以接受的收费系统遍布整个稻米链,包括制粉,零售和出口环节。它甚至可能以低廉的成本让农民包括在内,并恢复他们的地位并积极参与连锁经营。文章还建议可以使用更广泛的生态系统服务方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号