Abstract
Soil protection and sustainable agriculture have become a key issue in Common Agricultural Policy. Emphasis is being placed on climate-smart agriculture, nature-friendly agricultural technologies and implementation of a range of nature-based measures to protect soil, retain water in landscape, etc. Recent agricultural policy is mostly based on qualitative assessment of the current state and impacts of technologies. Economic assessment is still missing, although subsidies and other forms of financial support are provided from both national and European Union funds. Externalities in agriculture not only generate social costs and profits for the current generation but also strongly affect future well-being. The objective of this paper is to present a newly developed approach that enables monetary assessment of externalities in agriculture. The process of monetary assessment means inclusion and calculation of all costs and benefits, including positive and negative externalities going beyond financial revenue. The methodology is based on modified cost–benefit analysis using the concept of ecosystem services. The proposed method is demonstrated on a case study in the South Moravian Region of the Czech Republic. This region has been struggling with drought in the last few years, but its agricultural technologies are not adapted and appropriate nature-based solutions are not implemented. Economic analysis focuses on assessment of externalities and possible measures. It covers operating and investment costs; the loss of profits due to decreasing production; and benefits consisting mainly of prevented loss of regulating services. The results show that implementation of measures is always preferable regardless of climate change and avoids society loss.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
AdaptaN (2015) About the project. https://www.adaptan.net/o-projektu. Accessed 8 Mar 2020
AdaptaN (2016) Project documentation for 21 cadastral areas including designing of priority measures in detail. (Projektové dokumentace pro 21 katastrálních území včetně rozpracovaných prioritních opatření) https://www.adaptan.net/vystupy-projektu. Accessed 8 Mar 2020
AGC (2015) Agronormatives for agricultural and food production (Normativy pro zemědělskou a potravinářskou výrobu). AGroConsult: https://www.agronormativy.cz/. Accessed 8 Mar 2020
AOPK (2015) Price list of AOPK for 2015. www.dotace.nature.cz/res/data/003/000560.xls. Accessed 8 Mar 2020
BASE (2016) Agriculture and vine production (South Moravian Region). https://base-adaptation.eu/agriculture-and-vine-production-south-moravian-region. Accessed 8 Mar 2020
Bateman IJ, Harwood AR, Mace GM et al (2013) Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: land use in the United Kingdom. Science 341(6141):45–50. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1234379
Brabec J, Macháč J, Jílková J (2019) Using Bayesian networks to assess effectiveness of phosphorus abatement measures under the water framework directive. Water 11(9):14. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11091791
Boda CS (2018) From economic choice to social choice in coastal management: a critical assessment of the use of cost-benefit analysis in the evaluation of an erosion control project in Flagler County, Florida, USA. Ocean Coast Manag 162:85–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.09.017
Bolinches A, De Stefano L, Paredes-Arquiola J (2020) Too expensive to be worth it? A methodology to identify disproportionate costs of environmental measures as applied to the Middle Tagus River Spain. J Environ Plan Manag. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2020.1726731
Czech Technical University (2019) Catalogue of nature-based flood protection measures (Katalog přírodě blízkých protipovodňových opatření). Czech Technical University: Output from project STRIMA II: https://storm.fsv.cvut.cz/data/files/STRIMAII/katalogPBPO.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2020
Dennig F (2018) Climate change and the re-evaluation of cost-benefit analysis. Climatic change 151(1):43–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-017-2047-4
Dittrich R, Wreford A, Moran D (2016) A survey of decision-making approaches for climate change adaptation: are robust methods the way forward? Ecol Econ 122:79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.12.006
eAGRI (2014) Rural development program of the Czech Republic for 2007–2013, Axis II. Prague: Ministry of Agriculture (Program rozvoje venkova ČR na období 2007 – 2013, Osa II. Praha: Ministerstvo zemědělství). https://eagri.cz/public/web/mze/dotace/program-rozvoje-venkova-na-obdobi-2007/opatreni-osy-ii/. Accessed 8 Mar 2020
European Union (2015) Guide to cost-benefit analysis of investment projects economic appraisal tool for Cohesion Policy 2014–2020. Directorate-General for Regional and Urban policy REGIO DG 02—Communication, Brussels
Fernandes JA, Kauppila P, Uusitalo L, Fleming-Lehtinen V, Kuikka S, Pitkänen H (2012) Evaluation of reaching the targets of the water framework directive in the gulf of Finland. Environ Sci Technol 46:8220–8228. https://doi.org/10.1021/es300126b
Fezzi C, Bateman IJ, Askew T, Munday P, Pascual U, Sen A, Harwood A (2014) Valuing provisioning ecosystem services in agriculture: the impact of climate change on food production in the United Kingdom. Environ Resour Econ 57(2):197–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-013-9663-x
Fuguitt D, Fuguitt DJ, Wilcox SJ (1999) Cost-benefit analysis for public sector decision makers. Greenwood Publishing Group, Santa Barbara
Galioto F, Marconi V, Raggi M, Viaggi D (2013) An assessment of disproportionate costs in WFD: the experience of Emilia-Romagna. Water 5:1967–1995. https://doi.org/10.3390/w5041967
Georgopoulou E, Mirasgedis S, Sarafidis Y, Vitaliotou M, Lalas DP, Theloudis I, Giannoulaki KD, Dimopoulos D, Zavras V (2017) Climate change impacts and adaptation options for the Greek agriculture in 2021–2050: a monetary assessment. Clim Risk Manag 16:164–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2019.100196
Ghaley BB, Vesterdal L, Porter JR (2014) Quantification and valuation of ecosystem services in diverse production systems for informed decision-making. Environ Sci Policy 39:139–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2013.08.004
Greenhalgh S, Samarasinghe O, Curran-Cournane F, Wright W, Brown P (2017) Using ecosystem services to underpin cost–benefit analysis: is it a way to protect finite soil resources? Ecosyst Serv 27:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.07.005
Heckerman DE, Horvitz EJ, Nathwani BN (1992) Toward normative expert systems: part I, the pathfinder project. Methods Inf Med 31:90–105. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1634867
Howden SM, Soussana JF, Tubiello FN, Chhetri N, Dunlop M, Meinke H (2007) Adapting agriculture to climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104(50):19691–19696. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0701890104
Interreg V-A AT-CZ (2020) Adaptace na klimatické změny pomocí zelené infrastruktury. https://www.at-cz.eu/cz/ibox/po-2-zivotni-prostredi-a-zdroje/atcz142_klimagrun-klimaticka-zelen. Accessed 8 Mar 2020
Intersucho (2019). The soil saturation deviation of average condition in 1961–2010. Global Change Research Institute, CAS, Brno: https://www.intersucho.cz/en/. Accessed 22 Nov 2019
Jensen CL, Jacobsen BH, Olsen SB, Dubgaard A, Hasler B (2013) A practical CBA-based screening procedure for identification of river basins where the costs of fulfilling the WFD requirements may be disproportionate—applied to the case of Denmark. Environ Econ Policy 2:164–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2013.785676
Jónsson JÖG, Davíðsdóttir B (2016) Classification and valuation of soil ecosystem services. Agric Syst 145:24–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.02.010
Kapler P et al. (2008) Analysis of selected agricultural adaptation measures to climate change in the Czech Republic. (Analýza vybraných zemědělských adaptačních opatření na změnu klimatu v podmínkách ČR). UZEI: Output of the functional task of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech Republic No. 4217/2008
Konečná J, Pražan J, Podhrázská J, Kučera J, Koutná K, Fiala R (2014) Assessment of economic aspects of erosion control of agricultural land (Hodnocení ekonomických aspektů protierozní ochrany zemědělské půdy). https://www.uzei.cz/data/usr_001_cz_soubory/metodika_ekon_hodnoceni_protieroz_opatreni.pdf. Accessed 21 Aug 2019
Macháč J, Brabec J (2018) Assessment of disproportionate costs according to the WFD: comparison of applications of two approaches in the Catchment of the Stanovice Reservoir (Czech Republic). Water Resour Manag 32(4):1453–1466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1879-z
Masur JS, Posner EA (2018) Cost-benefit analysis and the judicial role. Univ Chicago Law Rev 85(4):935–986
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC
Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic (2017) The climate protection policy of the Czech Republic. https://www.mzp.cz/C125750E003B698B/en/climate_protection_policy/$FILE/OEOK_CPPES_20180105.pdf. Accessed 25 Augu 2019
Ndamani F, Watanabe T (2017) Developing indicators for adaptation decision-making under climate change in agriculture: a proposed evaluation model. Ecol Indic 76:366–375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.12.012
Niles MT, Lubell M, Brown M (2015) How limiting factors drive agricultural adaptation to climate change. Agric Ecosyst Environ 200:178–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2014.11.010
Pavka P (2016) Proposals for organizational, agrotechnical and biotechnical adaptation measures in the South Moravian Region (Návrhy organizačních, agrotechnických a biotechnických adaptačních opatření na území Jihomoravského kraje). https://www.adaptan.net/uploads/vystupy/2_Navrhy/Navrhy_adaptacnich_opatreni_na_uzemi_JMK.pdf. Accessed 3 Dec 2019
Pechrová M, Medonos T, Pražan J, Nesňal Z (2015) Selection of externalities prices from the price list of the Ministry for Regional Development for use within the CBA for Rural Development Program projects (Výběr cen externalit z ceníku Ministerstva pro místní rozvoj pro použití v rámci CBA pro projekty Programu rozvoje venkova). UZEI.
Polešáková M, Halasová H, Šimková H (2008) Average prices of transport and technical infrastructure—2008 update (Průměrné ceny dopravní a technické infrastruktury—aktualizace 2008). https://www.uur.cz/images/publikace/metodickeprirucky/plnezneni/vesnice-11-ceny-ti-2008/vesnice-11-ceny-ti-2008.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2020
Pretel J et al. (2011) Specification of existing estimates of climate change impacts in hydrology, water management, agriculture and forestry sectors and proposals for adaptation measures. Technical summary of project results 2007–2011 (Zpřesnění dosavadních odhadů dopadů klimatické změny v sektorech vodního hospodářství, zemědělství a lesnictví a návrhy adaptačních opatření. Technické ShrnutÍ Výsledků Projektu v letech 2007–2011). ČHMÚ, Prague. https://www.chmi.cz/files/portal/docs/meteo/ok/klimazmena/files/vav_TECHNICKE_SHRNUTI_2011.pdf. Accessed 22 Aug 2019
Roubalová J (2016) Survey of interests and motivational factors for the involvement of farmers in the implementation of proposed measures in the framework of the project with the main focus on protection against climate change impacts (Průzkum zájmů a motivačních faktorů pro zapojení zemědělců do realizace navržených opatření v rámci řešení projektu s hlavním zřetelem na ochranu vůči změně klimatu). https://www.adaptan.net/uploads/vystupy/4_Ochrana_ZPF/Pruzkum_zajmu_a_motivace_zemedelcu.pdf. Accessed 8 Mar 2020
Rupérez-Moreno C, Pérez-Sánchez J, Senent-Aparicio J, Flores-Asenjo P, Paz-Aparicio C (2017) Cost-benefit analysis of the managed aquifer recharge system for irrigation under climate change conditions in southern Spain. Water 9(5):343. https://doi.org/10.3390/w9050343
Sain G, Loboguerrero AM, Corner-Dolloff C, Lizarazo M, Nowak A, Martínez-Barón D, Andrieu N (2017) Costs and benefits of climate-smart agriculture: the case of the dry corridor in Guatemala. Agric Syst 151:163–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.05.004
Slavíková L, Raška P (2019a) This is my land! privately funded natural water retention measures in the Czech Republic. Nature-based flood risk management on private land. Springer, Cham, pp 55–67
Slavíková L, Raška P (2019b) Small water bodies in the landscape as a complex tool for water retention in the river basin area. Results of institutional analysis (Drobné vodní plochy v krajině jako komplexní nástroj k retenci vody v ploše povodí. Výsledky institucionální analýzy). UJEP: Output within the milestones 2 and 3 of the project: Saxon-Czech flood risk management II.
Slavíková L, Vojáček O, Macháč J, Hekrle M, Ansorge L (2015) Methodology of exemption application in case of cost-disporoportionality of achieving the "good status" on water bodies (Metodika k aplikaci výjimek z důvodu nákladové nepřiměřenosti opatření k dosahování dobrého stavu vodních útvarů). G. Masaryka, v.v.i, Výzkumný ústav vodohospodářský T
TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity ecological and economic foundations. Earthscan, London and Washington
Trantinová M (2011) The approach of Czech farmers to soil prevention regarding soil degradation by water erosion (Postoj české zemědělské praxe k ochraně půdy proti degradaci vlivem vodní eroze půdy). Stud Oecol 5(1):19–27
Trantinová M, et al. (2016) Economic consequences of climate change impacts on agricultural management (Ekonomické souvislosti dopadů klimatické změny na zemědělské hospodaření). UZEI: Technical report from project AdaptaN. https://www.adaptan.net/uploads/vystupy/5_Ekonomicke_analyzy/Ekonomicke_souvislosti_dopadu_na_zem_hospodareni.pdf. Accessed 25 Aug 2019
Vejchodská E (2015) Cost-benefit analysis: too often biased. E+M Ekon Manag 18(4):68–77. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2015-4-005
VÚV TGM (2019) Catalog of nature-based measures for water retention in the landscape (Katalog přírodě blízkých opatření pro zadržení vody v krajině). https://www.suchovkrajine.cz/vystupy. Accessed 8 Mar 2020
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the project “Economic support for strategic and decision-making processes at national and regional level, leading to sustainable energy use of agricultural biomass, while respecting food self-sufficiency and soil conservation” (grant number QK171037, Ministry of Agriculture programme) and the project AdaptaN, no. EHP-CZ02-OV-1–039-2015. The authors wish to thank two anonymous reviewers for their valuable and constructive comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Editorial responsibility: Josef Trögl.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Macháč, J., Trantinová, M. & Zaňková, L. Externalities in agriculture: How to include their monetary value in decision-making?. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 18, 3–20 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-020-02752-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-020-02752-7