Adoption of Environment-Friendly Agricultural Practices with Background Risk: Experimental Evidence

Abstract

Agriculture is one of the economic sectors most exposed to exogenous risks such as climate hazards and price volatility on agricultural markets. Agricultural policies targeting the adoption of environment-friendly but potentially risk-increasing practices cannot ignore this challenge. Farmers have indeed to decide if they take the foreground risk associated with the adoption of environmentfriendly practices, while simultaneously facing exogenous background risk beyond their control. Using a theoretical model and a public good experiment, we analyse the adoption of agri-environmental practices and the effect of agri-environmental subsidies in a context where risks are both foreground and background. While most of the literature on background risk focuses on its impact on individual decisions, we analyse the influence of background risk in a context of strategic uncertainty (contribution to a public good). The results highlight the potential synergies between greening the CAP and supporting risk management. We find that background risk discourages the adoption of green practices, although it affects all farmland independently from the farmer's choice of practices (environment friendly or conventional). An incentive payment per hectare of land farmed with green practices increases the adoption of risk-increasing practices but is significantly less effective in the presence of background risk.

Extension Agents’ Perceptions of the Role of Extension Services in Organic Agriculture: A Case Study from Saudi Arabia

“…For instance, the heavy use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides has led to adverse environmental effects [2,3], including soil erosion, the deterioration of soil fertility, and adverse effects on human health [4,5]. Consequently, intensive input-based agriculture conflicts with optimal and sustainable natural resource utilization, driving many countries to adopt eco-friendly, sustainable practices such as organic farming [1,6].…”

Improving Hill Farming: From Maize Monocropping to Alternative Cropping Systems in the Thai Highlands

“…Climate hazards were the most agreed impediments that discouraged farmers from adopting new practices. Literature suggests that farmers hesitate to invest in expensive technologies in the presence of climate [68,125,126]. For instance, farmers in low rainfall conditions used traditional varieties instead of improved seeds [68,149].…”

“…Shocks included drought, flood, landslide, insect pests or disease outbreak, illness, unemployment, and death of a household member. Experience with negative shocks is regarded as a key determinant of input use, investment, and adoption of improved farming practices [74,[123][124][125][126]. However, the effects can go both ways.…”

Twenty Years of Common Agricultural Policy in Europe: A Bibliometric Analysis

“…In these years, this topic has played an important role due to the increasing intensification of agriculture, which has generated losses of semi-natural habitats and crop diversity [46][47][48]. In this scenario, the interest of academics is focusing on whether or not CAP reforms really facilitate increases in biodiversity [49,50]. The results in this direction are very confused, because some researchers state that, due to the voluntary adoption of the second pillar-in particular, farmers tend to adopt this type of measure with simple management actions, with limited results in terms of biodiversity-the spread of more complex actions is very limited [51,52].…”