на главную поиск contacts

On the Economic Modelling of Field Sizes, Landscape Patterns, and Nature Elements for Landscape Management /доклад на 87 семинаре ЕААЕ, Assessing Rural Development Policies of the CAP, Vienna, Austria, 21-23 April 2004

Опубликовано на портале: 31-03-2005
This contribution deals with opportunities to integrate ecological objectives into landscape modelling. We start with the behaviour of farmers. By depicting the behaviour of farmers with respect to land use we determine farm and field sizes, as been dependent on prices, natural conditions, and structural variables, such as farm technologies. Then we pursue the idea that a geometrical interpretation of land use can help us to define an interface between farming, landscape modelling, and ecological concerns. This interface goes along economic rationales for income of farmers and ecological rationales for a redesign of landscapes. Next, for integrating ecological oriented nature components into a landscape planning, as been based on economic incentives, a payment scheme has to be introduced. Such payment scheme becomes part of farmers’ objective functions in a non-linear model. Core decision variables are the longitudinal stretch of field sizes and the transversal stretch of farm sizes. Then, given various natural frames within an overarching subdivision of field parcels, farms and the landscape are optimised. The suggested approach can be sequentially solved taking into consideration natural conditions and behaviour. Furthermore, a central focus is on policy instruments: 1. We cater for impacts of price policies on landscape structure (farm size) and ecology (heterogeneity of fields). Note, in this context, that it is important to depict the growth of fields as being a consequence of imposed price pressure, modern technology application, and income aspirations. 2. The ecological impacts of this process, also from intensity of farming, are addressed and measured as a diversity index. 3. Policies can be selected that maintain farm income and correct for negative ecological effects of field size changes. For this reason we suggest a principal agent approach and offer objective functions.

Ключевые слова

См. также:
Surajudeen O. Olowolayemo, Neil R. Martin, Jennie E. Raymond
Journal of Food Distribution Research. 1993.  Vol. 24. No. 2.
Raed F. Hattar, James R. Bacon, Ulrich C. Toensmeyer, C. M. Gempesaw
Journal of Food Distribution Research. 1994.  Vol. 25. No. 1.
Marianne McGarry Wolf
Journal of Food Distribution Research. 2000.  Vol. 31. No. 1. P. 198-203. 
J. Michael Harris, Noel Blisard
Journal of Food Distribution Research. 2001.  Vol. 32. No. 1. P. 65-73. 
Julie A. Bunn
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics. 1998.  Vol. 30. No. 2. P. 339-351. 
Tesfa G. Gebremedhin, Ralph J. Christy
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics. 1996.  Vol. 28. No. 1. P. 57-66.