Time filter

Source Type

Braunschweig, Germany

Pelikan J.,Thunen Institute of Market Analysis | Britz W.,University of Bonn | Hertel T.W.,Purdue University
Journal of Agricultural Economics | Year: 2015

This paper analyses the effects of introducing biodiversity-targeted ecological focus area (EFA) requirements on all farms with arable land in the EU by quantifying their global, regional, economic and environmental impacts in a mutually consistent way. To capture these impacts, different spatial scales need to be considered - ranging from on-farm decisions regarding the EFA in the EU, to supply response around the world. In order to address this challenge, we combine the supply side of the CAPRI model, which offers high spatial, farm and policy resolution in the EU, with the GTAP model of global trade and land use. Both models are linked through a multi-product, restricted-revenue function for the EU crop sector. The results predict improved environmental status in the high-yielding regions of the EU. However, output price increases lead to intensification in the more marginal areas of the EU where little or no additional land is taken out of production. The decrease in arable land in the EU is partially compensated by an increase of crop land, as well as increased fertiliser applications, in other regions of the globe. Thus, the improvement of environmental status in the EU comes at the price of global intensification, as well as the loss of forest and grassland areas outside the EU. Overall, we find that every hectare of land that is taken out of production in the EU increases greenhouse gas emissions in the rest of the world by 20.8 tonnes CO2 equivalent. © 2014 The Agricultural Economics Society.

Ott H.,European Commission | Ott H.,Thunen Institute of Market Analysis
Agricultural Economics (United Kingdom) | Year: 2014

Wheat, corn, rice, soybeans, and cotton experienced higher volatility in the second half of the 2000s. For the sample at hand, the unit root tests only validate a new period of high volatility for wheat and cotton. If in the next couple of years however, corn, rice and soybeans maintain their higher volatility, a new period of high volatility may also be validated statistically. Regarding the factors driving the intrayear volatility GMM estimates show that "commodity market fundamentals" i.e., the stock-to-use ratio and to a lesser extent the degree of internationalization, are the most systematically statistically significant coefficients among commodities. Over time, consecutive low stock-to-use ratios and a thin international market provoke typically high volatility. Speculative activity and liquidity in the agricultural derivative market have a stabilizing effect on the spot price, if any. Finally, "common macro" factors significantly impact volatility, especially the volatility of petrol and of exchange rates; their dispersion importance over the sample is quite sizeable. However, it is difficult to establish a link between, on the one hand, loose monetary policy, business cycle and inflation, and, on the other hand, commodity price volatility, as the sign of the estimated coefficient changes depending on the commodity and the estimated elasticities are quite low. © 2013 International Association of Agricultural Economists.

Zander K.,University of Kassel | Zander K.,Thunen Institute of Market Analysis | Stolz H.,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL | Hamm U.,University of Kassel
Appetite | Year: 2013

Ethical consumerism is a growing trend worldwide. Ethical consumers' expectations are increasing and neither the Fairtrade nor the organic farming concept covers all the ethical concerns of consumers. Against this background the aim of this research is to elicit consumers' preferences regarding organic food with additional ethical attributes and their relevance at the market place. A mixed methods research approach was applied by combining an Information Display Matrix, Focus Group Discussions and Choice Experiments in five European countries. According to the results of the Information Display Matrix, 'higher animal welfare', 'local production' and 'fair producer prices' were preferred in all countries. These three attributes were discussed with Focus Groups in depth, using rather emotive ways of labelling. While the ranking of the attributes was the same, the emotive way of communicating these attributes was, for the most part, disliked by participants. The same attributes were then used in Choice Experiments, but with completely revised communication arguments. According to the results of the Focus Groups, the arguments were presented in a factual manner, using short and concise statements. In this research step, consumers in all countries except Austria gave priority to 'local production'. 'Higher animal welfare' and 'fair producer prices' turned out to be relevant for buying decisions only in Germany and Switzerland. According to our results, there is substantial potential for product differentiation in the organic sector through making use of production standards that exceed existing minimum regulations. The combination of different research methods in a mixed methods approach proved to be very helpful. The results of earlier research steps provided the basis from which to learn - findings could be applied in subsequent steps, and used to adjust and deepen the research design. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd.

Belaya V.,Thunen Institute of Market Analysis | Hanf J.H.,Geisenheim University
Supply Chain Forum | Year: 2014

The purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of power on conflict in processor-supplier relationships and come up with recommendations for the use of power in conflict resolution. The study draws on data from 89 international food processors in Russia. The authors use structural equation modeling to test their hypotheses. Depending on the type of power, its effect on conflict may be completely different. The results indicate that coercive, reward, and legitimate powers have positive effects and expert, informational, and referent powers have negative effects on conflict. We put special focus in our research on a food processor as a focal company. Therefore, the data in our study represent a single perspective in the dyad. Our study has shown that supply chain practitioners can use expert, informational, and referent powers to effectively resolve conflict in processor-supplier relationships. © KEDGE BS.

Ma S.,French National Institute for Agricultural Research | Acutis M.,University of Milan | Barcza Z.,Institute of Ecology and Botany | Barcza Z.,Eotvos Lorand University | And 12 more authors.
Proceedings - 7th International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software: Bold Visions for Environmental Modeling, iEMSs 2014 | Year: 2014

The grassland model intercomparison of the FACCE MACSUR knowledge hub involves nine modelling approaches. Grassland-specific approaches (AnnuGrow, PaSim, SPACSYS) were compared to the approaches mainly conceived to simulate crops (ARMOSA, EPIC, STICS) and biomes (Biome-BGC MuSo, CARAIB, LPJmL). The model intercomparison exercise is run over nine grassland sites across Europe and peri-Mediterranean regions where data were collected from at least five up to 31 years, with focus on biomass production and carbon exchanges. The protocol for model intercomparison, derived from Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project, includes sensitivity tests, as well as blind and calibrated simulations. A fuzzy logic-based indicator for model assessment was developed to provide insights into agreement between simulations and observations, complexity of model structure and robustness of simulation results over a variety of conditions. Some results are illustrated, which show the limitations of the models run with current parameterization to simulate grassland dry matter and C exchanges across the Euro-Mediterranean region. The study also suggests that the regional calibration can accommodate model discrepancies. However, areas in the model structures have been identified that require further improvements to reduce uncertainties and increase reliability of model results in impact studies.

Discover hidden collaborations