Smallholder-dominated agricultural mosaic landscapes are highlighted as model production systems that deliver both economic and ecological goods in tropical agricultural landscapes, but trade-offs underlying current land-use dynamics are poorly known. Here, using the most comprehensive quantification of land-use change and associated bundles of ecosystem functions, services and economic benefits to date, we show that Indonesian smallholders predominantly choose farm portfolios with high economic productivity but low ecological value. The more profitable oil palm and rubber monocultures replace forests and agroforests critical for maintaining above- and below-ground ecological functions and the diversity of most taxa. Between the monocultures, the higher economic performance of oil palm over rubber comes with the reliance on fertilizer inputs and with increased nutrient leaching losses. Strategies to achieve an ecological-economic balance and a sustainable management of tropical smallholder landscapes must be prioritized to avoid further environmental degradation.

No abstract

Land-use transitions can enhance the livelihoods of smallholder farmers but potential economic-ecological trade-offs remain poorly understood. Here, we present an interdisciplinary study of the environmental, social and economic consequences of land-use transitions in a tropical smallholder landscape on Sumatra, Indonesia. We find widespread biodiversity-profit trade-offs resulting from land-use transitions from forest and agroforestry systems to rubber and oil palm monocultures, for 26,894 aboveground and belowground species and whole-ecosystem multidiversity. Despite variation between ecosystem functions, profit gains come at the expense of ecosystem multifunctionality, indicating far-reaching ecosystem deterioration. We identify landscape compositions that can mitigate trade-offs under optimal land-use allocation but also show that intensive monocultures always lead to higher profits. These findings suggest that, to reduce losses in biodiversity and ecosystem functioning, changes in economic incentive structures through well-designed policies are urgently needed.

No abstract

PurposeUsing a unique dataset of a commercial microfinance institution (MFI) in Tanzania, the purpose of this paper is to investigate first whether agricultural firms have a different probability to get a loan and whether their loans are differently volume rationed than loans to non‐agricultural firms. Second, the paper analyzes whether agricultural firms repay their loans with different delinquencies than non‐agricultural firms.Design/methodology/approachThe authors estimate a Probit‐Model for the probability of receiving a loan, a Heckman‐Model to investigate the magnitude of volume rationing for all loan applications and an OLS‐Model to examine the loan delinquencies of all microloans disbursed by the MFI.FindingsThe results reveal that agricultural firms face higher obstacles to get credit but as soon as they have access to credit, their loans are not differently volume rationed than those of non‐agricultural firms. Furthermore, agricultural firms are less often delinquent when paying back their loans than non‐agricultural firms.Research limitations/implicationsEven if the authors can show that access to credit and loan repayment is different for agricultural firms, the current regional focus of the MFI only allows for lending to agricultural firms in the greater Dar es Salaam area. Thus, these results might change in a rural setting. Besides general differences of the rural economic environment, the production type of agricultural firms might also differ in rural areas. Also, these results might change in different country contexts.Practical implicationsThe findings suggest that a higher risk exposition typically attributed to agricultural production must not necessarily lead to higher credit risk. They also show that the investigated MFI overestimates the credit risk of agricultural clients and, hence, should reconsider its risk assessment practice to be able to increase lending to the agricultural sector. In addition, the results might indicate that farmers qualify less often for a loan as they do not fit into the standard microcredit product.Originality/valueTo the authors' knowledge, this is the first paper which simultaneously investigates access to credit and the repayment behavior of agricultural firms.

Disinvestment, in the sense of project termination and liquidation of assets including the cession of a venture, is an important realm of entrepreneurial decision-making. This study presents the results of an experimental investigation modeling the choice to disinvest as a dynamic problem of optimal stopping in which the patterns of decisions are analyzed with entrepreneurs and non-entrepreneurs. Our experimental results reject the standard net present value approach as an account of observed behavior. Instead, most individuals seem to understand the value of waiting. Their choices are weakly related to the disinvestment triggers derived from a formal optimal stopping benchmark consistent with real options reasoning. We also observe a pronounced 'psychological inertia', i.e., most individuals hold on to a losing project for even longer than real options reasoning would predict. The study provides evidence for entrepreneurs and nonentrepreneurs being quite similar in their behavior.

No abstract

No abstract