Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T00:00:12.795Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - Multifunctionality and optimal environmental policies for agriculture in an open economy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2010

Jeffrey M. Peterson
Affiliation:
Cornell University
Richard N. Boisvert
Affiliation:
Cornell University
Harry de Gorter
Affiliation:
Cornell University
Merlinda D. Ingco
Affiliation:
The World Bank
L. Alan Winters
Affiliation:
University of Sussex
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Though agriculture has long been recognized as a polluter, it has also more recently been noted as a provider of non-market benefits. Examples of these public goods that are by-products of agriculture include landscape amenities, a habitat for wildlife, and the preservation of agrarian cultural heritage (OECD 1997a; 1997b; Bohman et al., 1999). Though many of these benefits are difficult to define and measure, non-market valuation studies have found substantial non-market values for farmland in different regions around the world (Beasley, Workman, and Williams, 1986; Hackl and Pruckner, 1997; López, Shah and Altobello, 1994). The notion of agriculture providing a set of non-market goods and bads as joint products with market goods has given rise to the term “multifunctionality” (Lindland, 1998; Nersten and Prestegard, 1998; Runge, 1998). Conceptually, a “multifunctional” agriculture means that the agricultural production process is a multioutput technology, where some outputs are privately traded commodities and others are public goods. This case differs from standard environmental models where some activity in the economy generates a single externality.

The realization that agriculture is multifunctional has important implications for policy-making at both the domestic and international levels. In the domestic sphere, policies aimed at the various externalities from agriculture are typically legislated and administered independently. Likewise, the economics literature almost always examines externalities in isolation, either implicitly or explicitly assuming that other (potentially related) externalities are fixed or unimportant.

Type
Chapter
Information
Agriculture and the New Trade Agenda
Creating a Global Trading Environment for Development
, pp. 458 - 483
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahearn, M., J. Yee, V. E. Ball, R. Nehring, A. Somwaru, and R. Evans, 1998. “Agricultural Productivity in the United States,” Bulletin 740, Economic Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC
Anderson, K., 1992a. “Agricultural Trade Liberalization and the Environment: A Global Perspective,” The World Economy, 15, 153–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, K. 1992b. “The Standard Welfare Economics of Policies Affecting Trade and the Environment,” in K. Anderson and R. Black (eds.), The Greening of World Trade Issues, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press
Anderson, K. and B. Hoekman, 1999. “Agriculture and the New Trade Agenda,” paper presented at the American Economic Association Annual Meeting, January 3–5, New York
Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics (Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics), 1999. “‘Multifunctionality’: A Pretext for Protection?,” Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics Current Issues, 99.3, Canberra
Ball, V. E., Bureau, J., Nehring, R., and Somwaru, A., 1997. “Agricultural Productivity Revisited,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 79, 1045–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beasley, S. D., Workman, W. C., and Williams, N. A., 1986. “Estimating Amenity Values on Urban Fringe Farmland: A Contingent Valuation Approach,” Growth and Change, 17, 70–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beghin, J., Dessus, S., Roland-Holst, D., and Mensbrugghe, D., 1994. “The Trade and Environment Nexus in Mexican Agriculture. A General Equilibrium Analysis,” Agricultural Economics, 17(2–3), 115–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergstrom, J. C., Dillman, B. L., and Stoll, J. R., 1985. “Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land: The Case of Prime Agricultural Land,” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, 17, 139–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blandford, D. and Fulponi, L., 1999. “Emerging Public Concerns in Agriculture: Domestic Policies and International Trade Commitments,” European Review of Agricultural Economics, 26, 409–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohman, M., J. Cooper, D. Mullarkey, M. A. Normile, D. Skully, S. Vogel, and E. Young, 1999. “The Use and Abuse of Multifunctionality,” Economic Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, November, econ.ag.gov/briefing/wto
Chambers, R. G., 1988. Applied Production Analysis: A Dual Approach, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press
Copeland, B. R., 1994. “International Trade and the Environment: Policy Reform in a Polluted Small Open Economy,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 26, 44–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixit, A. and V. Norman, 1980. Theory of International Trade: A Dual, General Equilibrium Approach, London: Cambridge University Press
Floyd, J. E., 1965. “The Effects of Farm Price Supports on the Return to Land and Labor in Agriculture,” Journal of Political Economy, 73, 148–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, B. L., 1987. The Economics of Agricultural Policies, New York: Macmillan
Hackl, F. and Pruckner, G. J., 1997. “Towards More Efficient Compensation Programmes for Tourists' Benefits from Agriculture in Europe,” Environmental and Resource Economics, 10, 189–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halstead, J. M., 1984. “Measuring the Nonmarket Value of Massachusetts Agricultural Land: A Case Study,” Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council, 13, 12–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holtermann, S., 1976. “Alternative Tax Systems to Correct for Externalities and the Efficiency of Paying Compensation,” Economica, 43, 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krieger, D. J., 1999. “Saving Open Spaces: Public Support for Farmland Protection,” American Farmland Trust Center for Agriculture in the Environment Working Paper, CAE/WP99–1
Krutilla, K., 1991. “Environmental Regulation in an Open Economy,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 20, 127–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindland, J., 1998. “Non-Trade Concerns in a Multifunctional Agriculture,” paper presented to Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Workshop on Emerging Trade Issues in Agriculture, October 26–27, oecd.org/agr/trade/Paris
López, R. A., Shah, F. A., and Altobello, M. A., 1994. “Amenity Benefits and the Optimal Allocation of Land,” Land Economics, 70, 53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mas-Collel, A., M. D. Whinston, and J. R. Green, 1995. Microeconomic Theory. New York: Oxford University Press
Nersten, N. K. and S. S. Prestegard, 1998. “Non-Trade Concerns in the World Trade Organization Negotiations,” paper presented at the International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium Annual Meeting, Florida
Norwegian Royal Ministry of Agriculture, 1998. “Non-Trade Concerns in a Multifunctional Agriculture: Implications for Agricultural Policy and the Multilateral Trading System,” June
Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President of the United States, 1999. Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2000, Washington, DC
Ollikainen, M., 1999. “On Optimal Agri-Environmental Policy: A Public Finance View,” paper presented at the IXth European Association of Agricultural Economists Congress, Warsaw
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), 1997a. “Environmental Benefits from Agriculture: Issues and Policies,” The Helsinki Seminar, Paris
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) 1997b. Helsinki Seminar on Environmental Benefits from Agriculture: Country Case Studies, GD(97)110, Paris
Pimentel, D., Acquay, H., Biltonen, M., Rice, P., Silva, M., Nelson, J., Lipner, J., Giordano, S., Horowitz, A., and D'Amore, M., 1992. “Environmental and Economic Costs of Pesticide Use,” BioScience, 42, 750–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poe, G. L., 1997. “Extra-Market Values and Conflicting Agricultural Environmental Policies,” Choices, 3, 4–8Google Scholar
Poe, G. L. 1998. “Valuation of Groundwater Quality Using a Contingent Valuation Damage Function Approach,” Water Resources Research, 34, 3627–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poe, G. L. 1999. “‘Maximizing the Environmental Benefits Per Dollar Expended’: An Economic Interpretation and Review of Agricultural Environmental Benefits and Costs,” Society & Natural Resources, 12, 571–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, J. R., 1990. “The Value of Groundwater Protection: Measurement of Willingness-to-Pay Information and its Utilization by Local Government Decision-Makers,” Dissertation, Department of Agricultural Economics, Cornell University
Runge, C. F., 1998. “Emerging Issues in Agricultural Trade and the Environment,” Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Workshop on Emerging Trade Issues in Agriculture, October 26–27, Paris, oecd.org/agr/trade/
Schamel, G. and H. de Gorter, 1997. “Trade and the Environment: Domestic versus Global Perspectives,” Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Wirtschafts-und Sozialwissenschaften an der Landwirtschaftlich-Gärtnerischen Fakultät, Working Paper, 34/97
Schultz, S. D. and Lindsay, B. E., 1990. “The Willingness to Pay for Groundwater Protection,” Water Resources Research, 26, 1869–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siebert, H., J. Eichberger, R. Gronych, and R. Pethig, 1980. Trade and Environment: A Theoretical Enquiry, Amsterdam: Elsevier
Whalley, J., 1999. “Environmental Considerations in a New Multilateral Agricultural Negotiations, and Associated Developing Country Concerns,” paper presented at the Conference on Agriculture and the New Trade Agenda in the World Trade Organization 2000 Negotiations, 1– 2 October, Geneva
World Trade Organization (World Trade Organization), 1998. “Non Trade Concerns in the Next Agricultural Negotiations,” submission by Argentina to the Committee on Trade and Environment, WT/Committee of Trade and Environment/W/97, Geneva, August, wto.org/wto/ddf/ep/public.html
World Trade Organization (World Trade Organization) 1999a. “Environmental Effects of Trade Liberalization in the Agricultural Sector,” submission by Norway to the Committee on Trade and the Environment, WT/Committee of Trade and Environment/W/100, Geneva, January, wto.org/wto/ddf/ep/public.html
World Trade Organization (World Trade Organization) 1999b. “Preparations for the 1999 Ministerial Conference: Negotiations on Agriculture,” Communication from Japan to the General Council, WT/GC/W/220, Geneva, June, wto.org/wto/ddf/ep/public.html
World Trade Organization (World Trade Organization) 1999c. “Preparations for the 1999 Ministerial Conference: Negotiations on Agriculture,” Communication from Switzerland to the General Council, WT/GC/W/261, Geneva, July, wto.org/wto/ddf/ep/public.html

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×