How much green for the buck? Estimating additional and windfall effects of French agro-environmental schemes by DID-matching

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

Volumn 65, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 12-27

  Chabé Ferret, Sylvain ^a,b   Subervie, Julie ^a,c  

^a UMR Territoires   (France)

^b YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UMR MOISA   (France)

Author keywords

Additionality; Agricultural practices; Agro environmental schemes; Cover crops; Crop diversity; Difference in difference matching; Grass buffer strips; Organic farming; Treatment effects; Windfall effects

Indexed keywords

ADDITIONALITY; AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES; AGRO-ENVIRONMENTAL SCHEMES; BUFFER STRIP; COVER CROPS; CROP DIVERSITY; DIFFERENCE-IN-DIFFERENCES; ORGANIC FARMING; TREATMENT EFFECTS; WINDFALL EFFECTS;

COST EFFECTIVENESS; CROPS; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ESTIMATION;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

AGRI-ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; AGRICULTURAL PRACTICE; BUFFER ZONE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COVER CROP; CROP ROTATION; EUROPEAN UNION; GRASS; ORGANIC FARMING;

FRANCE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84872264256     PISSN: 00950696     EISSN: 10960449     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2012.09.003     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. J. Aakkula, Economic value of pro-environmental farming: a critical and decision-making oriented application of the contingent valuation method, Discussion Paper, Agricultural Economics Research Institute, Helsinki, Finland, 1999.
2. Abadie A. Semiparametric difference-in-differences estimators. Review of Economic Studies 2005, 72(1):1-19.
3. Abbring J.H., Heckman J.J. Econometric evaluation of social programs, part III. distributional treatment effects, dynamic treatment effects, dynamic discrete choice, and general equilibrium policy evaluation. Handbook of Econometrics 2007, vol. 6:5145-5303. Elsevier, Part 2, chap. 72.
4. Anton W.R.Q., Deltas G., Khanna M. Incentives for environmental self-regulation and implications for environmental performance. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2004, 48(1):632-654.
5. Arimura T.H., Hibiki A., Katayama H. Is a voluntary approach an effective environmental policy instrument?. A case for environmental management systems. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2008, 55(3):281-295.
6. Bertrand M., Duflo E., Mullainathan S. How much should we trust differerences in differences estimates?. Quarterly Journal of Economics 2004, 119(1):249-275.
7. S. Chabé-Ferret, To control or not to control ? Bias of simple vs difference-in-difference matching in a dynamic framework, in: 10th Econometric Society World Congress (ESWC), Shanghai, China, 2010.
8. Dasgupta S., Hettige H., Wheeler D. What improves environmental compliance? Evidence from Mexican industry. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2000, 39(1):39-66.
9. Ducos G., Dupraz P., Bonnieux F. Agri-environment contract adoption under fixed and variable compliance costs. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2009, 52(5):669-687.
10. Fall M., Magnac T. How valuable is on-farm work to farmers?. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2004, 86(1):267-281.
11. A. Fan, Nitrate and nitrite in drinking water: a toxicological review, in: Jerome O. Nriagu (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Environmental Health, ed. Elsevier, Burlington, 2011, pp. 137-145.
12. Fleurbaey M., Maniquet F. Fair income tax. Review of Economic Studies 2006, 73(1):55-83.
13. Gren I.-M. International versus national actions against nitrogen pollution of the Baltic Sea. Environmental & Resource Economics 2001, 20(1):41-59.
14. Heckman J.J., Hotz V.J. Choosing among alternative nonexperimental methods for estimating the impact of social programs. the case of manpower training. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1989, 84(408):862-874.
15. Heckman J.J., Ichimura H., Todd P.E. Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator. evidence from evaluating a job training programme. The Review of Economic Studies 1997, 64(4, Special Issue: Evaluation of Training and Other Social Programmes):605-654.
16. Holland P.W. Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1986, 81:945-970.
17. Imbens G.W. Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity. a review. The Review of Economics and Statistics 2004, 86(1):4-29.
18. Khanna M., Damon L.A. EPA's voluntary 33/50 program. impact on toxic releases and economic performance of firms. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 1999, 37(1):1-25.
19. Kleijn D., Baquero R.A., Clough Y., Diaz M., Esteban J., Fernandez F., Gabriel D., Herzog F., Holzschuh A., Johl R., Knop E., Kruess A., Marshall E.J.P., Steffan-Dewenter I., Tscharntke T., Verhulst J., West T.M., Yela J.L. Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries. Ecology Letters 2006, 9(3):243-254.
20. Lankoski J., Ollikainen M. Agri-environmental externalities. a framework for designing targeted policies. European Review of Agricultural Economics 2003, 30(1):51-75.
21. Lankoski J., Ollikainen M. Biofuel policies and the environment. Do climate benefits warrant increased production from biofuel feedstocks?. Ecological Economics 2011, 70(4):676-687.
22. Lopez R.E. Estimating labor supply and production decisions of self-employed farm producers. European Economic Review 1984, 24(1):61-82.
23. Lynch L., Gray W., Geoghegan J. Are farmland preservation program easement restrictions capitalized into farmland prices? what can a propensity score matching analysis tell us?. Review of Agricultural Economics 2007, 29(3):502-509.
24. Lynch L., Liu X. Impact of designated preservation areas on rate of preservation and rate of conversion. preliminary evidence. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2007, 89(5):1205-1210.
25. Pufahl A., Weiss C.R. Evaluating the effects of farm programmes. results from propensity score matching. European Review of Agricultural Economics 2009, 36(1):79-101.
26. Roberts M.J., Bucholtz S. Slippage in the conservation reserve program or spurious correlation? a comment. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2005, 87(1):244-250.
27. Roberts M.J., Lubowski R.N. Enduring impacts of land retirement policies. evidence from the conservation reserve program. Land Economics 2007, 83(4):516-538.
28. Rosenbaum P.R., Rubin D.B. Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The American Statistician 1985, 39(1):33-38.
29. Rubin D.B. Bayesian inference for causal effects. the role of randomization. The Annals of Statistics 1978, 6(1):34-58.
30. Rust J. Optimal replacement of GMC bus engines. an empirical model of Harold Zurcher. Econometrica 1987, 55(5):999-1033.
31. Sandhu H.S., Wratten S.D., Cullen R., Case B. The future of farming. the value of ecosystem services in conventional and organic arable land. An experimental approach. Ecological Economics 2008, 64(4):835-848.
32. Smith J.A., Todd P.E. Does matching overcome lalonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?. Journal of Econometrics 2005, 125(1-2):305-353.
33. Smith V.H., Goodwin B.K. An ex post evaluation of the conservation reserve, federal crop insurance, and other government programs. program participation and soil erosion. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 2003, 28(02).
34. Todd P.E. Evaluating social programs with endogenous program placement and selection of the treated. Handbook of Development Economics 2007, vol. 4:3847-3894. Elsevier, chapter 60.
35. van Grinsven H., Rabl A., de Kok T. Estimation of incidence and social cost of colon cancer due to nitrate in drinking water in the eu. a tentative cost-benefit assessment. Environmental Health 2010, 9(1):58.
36. V. Vehkasalo, Ympäristötuen Yhteiskunnallinen Kannattavuus, Discussion Paper, Agricultural Economics Research Institute, Helsinki, Finland, 1999.
37. Wu J. Slippage effects of the conservation reserve program. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2000, 82(4):979-992.
38. Wu J., Adams R.M., Kling C.L., Tanaka K. From microlevel decisions to landscape changes. an assessment of agricultural conservation policies. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2004, 86(1):26-41.