An economic analysis of the implementation options of soil conservation policies

摘要

The objective of this study is to analyze the economic and agricultural aspects of the implementation of soil conservation programmes and to suggest appropriate measure-instrument combinations for efficient soil conservation as a decision support for the implementation of soil conservation policies. Emphasis is given to the resource and institutional economics of soil conservation. In the empirical part, the efficiency of policy options is analysed using the example of a region in north-eastern Germany based on model calculations. After an introduction to the topic of soil functions and soil degradation definitions, the implementation concepts for soil protection measures at the international and national level are described. Based on the theoretical economic analysis of soils as a natural resource, the existing property rights, the public good characteristics of soils and the resulting externalities lead to the conclusion that market failure does exist. Therefore, the non-market coordination of soil use is justified. A cost-effectiveness analysis was derived based on the theory of ?safe-minimum-standard? for the appropriate assessment of the implementation options of soil conservation policies.A fuzzy-logic-based method, which is based on an expanded Universal Soil Loss Equation approach (USLE), was applied for the assessment of soil erosion risk in the sample region. The approach considers both the natural conditions and the characteristics of the cropping practice. The very detailed description of the cropping practices allowed for the specific assessment of erosion relevant effects. This, in combination with the high detail site descriptions provided this study with a very precise regional approach. The regional decision-support system MODAM (multi-objective decision support tool for agro-ecosystem management) was applied for the assessment of the economic and environmental impacts of different policy options. The policy scenarios examined include a CAP reform scenario with decoupled payments in accordance with the proposed conditions of the year 2013. This scenario was used as the reference scenario for the other possible scenarios of soil conservation policies. The three main scenarios for the policy options are 1) a non-spatially oriented, 2) a spatially-oriented incentive programmes for reduced tillage practices and 3) a regulation scenario that prohibits the cultivation of highly erosive crops (row crops) on erodible soils. The prohibition of row crops on highly erodible soils led both to lower on-farm costs and lower budget costs in comparison to the incentive programmes for reduced tillage. All three scenarios had comparable reduction in soil erosion. Based on the modeling results the ban on row crops on highly erodible sites is therefore the preferable option in terms of the cost-effectiveness ratio. The inclusion of transaction costs in this study helps expand the scope of policy analysis, for the total costs of a policy would be underestimated if only the budget costs for the direct payments to farmers were considered. Transaction costs understood as a cost for the (re-) definition and implementation of property rights can reach substantial amounts and reduce the total efficiency of a policy. The results of the qualitative analysis of the transaction costs of the study policy options also supported the option of row crop regulation on highly erodible soils. A model that serves as decision support for both the economic and agricultural aspects of soil conservation had been successfully developed in this study. Different policy options were analysed for a cost-effective solution of soil conservation programmes. Based on the final discussion on the involved transaction costs, the regulatory approach (a spatially-focussed ban on row crops) was shown to be the most cost-effective option with potentially lower transaction costs. The main criteria for a cost-effective policy design are high efficiency in both the agricultural measures (practices) and the spatial correlation between the programme area and the high erosion risk areas. Incentive programmes in combination with less effective agricultural practices showed a worse cost-benefit ratio for the sample area than the regulation approach, which is based on more effective agricultural practices.