Cost-effectiveness of organic farming for achieving environmental policy targets in Switzerland

The aim of this PhD thesis was to calculate the cost-effectiveness of organic farming in achieving environmental policy targets compared to single-agri-environmental policies. Using a theoretical model, it was demonstrated that financial support for organic farming does not in principle contradict the Tinbergen Rule, even if there are other targeted policy measures which are more cost-effective in achieving specific environmental goals. Hence, organic farming should be included as an option within a mix of other policies as long as its costeffectiveness with respect to the overall set of policy goals is superior to that of a combination of other policy instruments. The cost-effectiveness of agri-environmental policies can be understood as a function of policy uptake, environmental effects, and public expenditure. Taking the Swiss agricultural sector as an empirical case study, both the costs and effects of organic farming and other single agri environmental measures were calculated at sector level. Therefore, the economic sector model FARMIS was extended by three modules encompassing a) life cycle assessments for fossil energy use, biodiversity and eutrophication, b) public expenditure, including policy-related transaction costs, and c) uptake of agri-environmental policies. The calculations revealed a slightly higher abatement cost with organic farming of 14 CHF/ha for a 1 % average improvement in the environmental indicators, compared to a combination of three single agri-environmental policies (11 CHF/ha), including both extensification of arable land and meadows. In view of total public expenditure on agriculture of 2 to 3 kCHF per ha in Switzerland, these differences can be understood as marginal. Sensitivity analyses confirm that the cost-effectiveness of organic agriculture and combined agri-environmental policies is very similar. Thus it is concluded that financial support for organic farms in Switzerland is economically sound in view of the provision of public goods

Governance Structures for the Multifunctionality of Agriculture in the EU - Bottom-up View of Local Stakeholders in Europe

The multifunctional character of agriculture has gained increasing attention in both policy and research over the last few years. The most relevant policy initiative for the programming period 2000-2006 in terms of multifunctionality is Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999, while LEADER+ is of particular interest due to its innovative approach to governance (Schader and Stolze, 2005a). In order to improve governance structures it is necessary to find out what the governance situation is at the regional level and what regional stakeholders think about the multi-level governance system. So far, there is little empirical evidence regarding the way local stakeholders perceive governance processes in the EU in terms of rural development. The aims of this study were: - to identify the governance structures relevant to the multifunctionality of agriculture, - to determine the strengths and weaknesses of regional implementation of the second pillar of the EU Common Agricultural Policy, - and to develop recommendations for good governance in rural development policy

The Network of Ecological Compensation Areas in Switzerland

Since 1993, the Swiss law and Ordinance on Direct Payments for Agriculture (ODP) enables farmers to be compensated for ecological measures. A catalogue lists different possible measures which can be implemented at farm level both to create space for nature and biodiversity and to generate an alternative income for farmers. Measures include the maintenance of e. g. semi-natural structures in the landscape such as high-stem trees, hedges, pastures and meadows which are not intensively used (detailed catalogue: ART 2009). Succeeding a fast increase in the number of these areas, stagnation has been observed (BIODIVERSITYMONITORING 2009). Additionally, it has become evident, that many compensation areas are in unfavourable conditions for biodiversity and their quality, especially species richness, is low. This motivated the extension of the ODP with an additional ordinance which tackles two main points: Ordinance on Regional Promotion of Quality and Networking of Ecological Compensation Areas in Agriculture (OEQ 2001)

The societal demand for multifunctionality – priorities from the perspective of regional stakeholders

In order to foster a multifunctional agriculture that is adapted to the societal demand, the preferences of the regional population for functions provided by agriculture have to be identified. This demand, however, is difficult to measure economically, since multifunctionality is partly concerned with public goods. Our study aimed at identifying the societal demand for economic, ecological and sociocultural functions of agriculture and the underlying reasons within the framework of multifunctionality. Therefore, methods which can measure several functions at the same time and which include also qualitative information in addition to revealing Willingness-to-pay (WTP) values were regarded as most appropriate. For our research question, we opted for an indirect method, based on stated, collective preferences of regional representatives and experts for rural development (e.g. mayors from towns located in the case studies, representative from tourist or environmental organisations, experts from agricultural or regional administrative bodies, coordinators of Leader projects and researchers). We applied Stakeholder Delphi Approach: The first step aimed at seizing the whole range of relevant views on the issue by individual face-to-face interviews, while the second step condensed this information to a prioritisation of functions using a budget game approach. The results of the interviews were analysed by means of qualitative content analysis. Prioritisations and budget allocations were interpreted with descriptive statistics. Assuming that there are regional differences concerning the societal demand, this study was implemented in four case studies: River Gudenå (Denmark), Ostprignitz-Ruppin (OPR) (Germany), Mugello, (Italy), and Kościan (Poland). First, each case study was analysed separately, then a cross-country comparison was carried out. The results of this research indicate that there is a considerable societal demand for multifunctional agriculture in all cases studied. However, the roles the stakeholders attributed to regional agriculture varied between the case studies. In most of the case studies, the stakeholders opted for a relatively balanced demand allocation in terms of economic, ecological, and socio-cultural functions, whereas the stakeholders in OPR put a slight emphasis on economic functions. While the stakeholders of the OPR case study gave absolute priority to the provision of jobs, the stakeholders in the Danish case study were strongly concerned about the elimination of negative effects of agriculture such as smells and nitrate in drinking water. In both cases a significant share of the demand was allocated towards para agricultural activities, such as agri-tourism and the provision of renewable energies, whereas functions directly related to food production attained a relatively small proportion of the demand. The case study “Kościan” in Poland suggests, in contrast, a strong societal demand for food-production related functions, such as regional food supply and quality food production, while an improvement of the rural infrastructure was also highly prioritised. In the case of Mugello (Italy) two clusters of agricultural functions were identified: A high societal demand was stated both for the functions related to food production and landscape related functions, including the maintenance of a hydro-ecological equilibrium. We conclude that despite the regional differences concerning the importance of multifunctional services of agriculture, there is a strong demand for multifunctional agriculture as a whole. These results have to be interpreted with care, given the explorative character of the study. We faced a variety of methodological challenges. Particularly, the relatively small sample per case study and the limited information flow to the involved stakeholders needs to be addressed in future studies. Nevertheless, our results give valuable insights into the demand structure and its underlying reasons for the complex matter of multifunctionality. Thus, on the basis of our results we are able to provide policy recommendations for a future Model of European Agriculture backed by the preferences prevailing in society. Furthermore, we give suggestions for further research concerning the societal demand for the functions of agriculture

Organic Farming - An efficient and integrated system approach responding to pressing challenges

- One strict and easily understandable rule in organic farming such as the ban of synthetic fertilisers often results in a number of environmental benefits. - Organic farming support helps to minimise costs for farm support while increasing its environmental effects. - Cost effectiveness of organic farming support can result from consistency of the policy measure, the system approach of organic farming and resulting synergetic environmental effects, as well as increased market values and lower transaction costs

Who's "mixing” the languages? Statistical-sociolinguistic analyses of differently developed bilingual practice of Albanian-speaking school pupils in German-speaking Switzerland

The extent to which the many Albanian-speaking children and adolescents in Switzerland apply a bilingual mode differs considerably. As part of a larger project, a quantitative exploratory study seeks to understand whether the frequency of code-switching is determined by demographic, individual, and peer-group-related factors. The fact that no striking relationships between these factors can be observed will be discussed with a view to the specificity of Albanian migration. Furthermore, these results raise questions with regard to the determinants of bilingual practice and the characteristics of "prototypical code-switch-speakers.

How cost-effective are direct payments to organic farms for achieving environmental policy targets?

Since 1993, the Swiss federal agricultural policy has been providing financial support for organic farming via area payments. Like other voluntary agri-environmental measures (AEM), these payments are intended as incentives for farmers to comply with defined production standards. Such payments lead to better environmental performance, as compliance with organic production standards averts negative and provides positive external effects compared to conventional or integrated farming (CRER, 2002). For instance, organic farming is largely not dependent on external inputs. This minimises the resource use of the farming system and limits the nutrient loads in the system, which in turn leads to less overfertilisation and reduced eutrophication risks involving nitrogen and phosphorus (Haas et al., 2001). Besides effectiveness, against the background of limited public budgets, efficiency in delivering environmental impacts plays a fundamental role in the further development of direct payment schemes (Swiss Federal Council, 2009). The targeting and tailoring of policies to achieve maximum effectiveness with a given budget is essential (OECD, 2007). It is therefore necessary to compare both environmental effects and the societal costs of AEM with each other in order to provide a basis for economically sound policy design (Pearce, 2005). Agricultural economists hold differing views on the cost-effectiveness of organic farming support payments. Von Alvensleben (1998) argues that the organic farming area support payments are not economically sound, as the policy goals could be achieved more efficiently using more flexible and targeted combinations of various AEM. The economic rationale behind this argument was introduced by Tinbergen (1956), who theorised that an efficient policy requires at least as many specific instruments as there are specific goals. However, the Tinbergen Rule may not apply fully in this case due to interactions between policies, conflicting goals and the limited determinability of different aspects of environmental performance. Furthermore, the multi-purpose character of organic agriculture could increase its cost-effectiveness due to its potentially lower transaction costs compared to targeted AEM (Dabbert et al., 2004). Empirical papers on this question lack. Thus, this paper aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of a) direct payments to organic farms and b) AEM, in providing environmental services. This is done, using the current Swiss agricultural policy scheme as a case study

The trade-off between scope and precision in sustainability assessments of food systems

With sustainability becoming an increasingly important issue, several tools have been developed, promising to assess sustainability of farms and farming systems. However, looking closer at the scope, the level of assessment and the precision of indicators used for impact assessment we discern considerable differences between the sustainability impact assessment tools at hand. The aim of this paper is therefore to classify and analyse six different sustainability impact assessment tools with respect to the assessment level, the scope and the precision. From our analysis we can conclude that there is a trade-off between scope and precision of these tools. Thus one-size-fits-all solutions with respect to tool selection are rarely feasible. Furthermore, as the indicator selection determines the assessment results, different and inconsistent indicators could lead to contradicting and not comparable assessment results. To overcome this shortcoming, sustainability impact assessments should disclose the methodological approach as well as the indictor sets use and aim for harmonisation of assumptions

CH-FARMIS 2.0: A Sector-Model to Assess the Economic and Environmental Impacts of Swiss Direct Payment Schemes

Quantitative sector models are an essential tool to forecast the sector-wide economic effects of agricultural policies. However, to cover ecological effects with economic sector models is still a methodological challenge. This poster describes a promising approach, which is currently implemented at the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) to meet this challenge. CH-FARMIS is a sector consistent farm group model, which is able to forecast economic impacts of policies on farm, regional and sector-level. In a flexible way, CH-FARMIS is able to split up the farm sector in farm groups according to various characteristics (region, farming system, farm type, etc.). CH-FARMIS is based on positive mathematical programming (PMP) to allow for a realistic reproduction of the Swiss agricultural sector. Currently, CH-FARMIS is augmented in two ways in order to illustrate the environmental impacts of farmers’ decisions and land use: Firstly, intensity levels of farm production are introduced. Secondly, all farm activities and their intensity levels are equipped with ecological indicators, which are derived from LCA data. In an iterative Delphi-procedure, polling a set of competence teams, the LCA data is adapted to the model needs and transposed from farm level to sector level. The following indicators will be implemented in CH-FARMIS 2.0: Biodiversity, water contamination (N, P) and energy use. The enlarged version of CH-FARMIS will be a flexible tool which can be used for both exante assessments of policy reforms and the quantitative evaluation of single direct payments. CH-FARMIS 2.0 is planned to be operable in mid 2008