Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun. 2022, 70(4-5), 295-306 | DOI: 10.11118/actaun.2022.022

Economic Evaluation of the Selected Ecologically Significant Element in Agriculture

Ivo Horák1, Petr Marada2
1 Department of Finance, Faculty of Business and Economics, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic
2 Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of AgriSciences, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic

Ecologically significant elements are essential not only for the development and quality of life in rural areas, but also for agricultural management. Services provided by these ecosystems ensure water retention in the landscape, a protection against erosion and an increase in biodiversity. In the context of current political debates, the importance and necessity of highlighting the value of ecologically significant elements is desirable from the farmer's point of view. This study inquires into costs and benefits while implementing a selected ecologically significant element - landscaping orchard in an agricultural area, taking into account not only the explicit benefits that could be marketed, but also the benefits floating from the ecosystem services. The case study found out that whilst complying with the general conditions to be able to apply for the State subsidies with the value of ecosystem services, the Net Present Value is positive for the given project. The monetary value of ecosystem services provided by the given landscaping orchard is estimated to be, according to Ecosystem Services Valuation Database (2020), 125 thous. CZK.year-1 per 1.6 ha. That is a considerable amount which should be noted not only by the farmers but also by the policy makers who should reconsider the subsidies for farmers and pay more attention to their financial needs.

Keywords: agriculture, extensive orchards, ecology, ecosystem services, valuation, cost-benefit, environmental economics

Received: December 22, 2021; Revised: August 16, 2022; Accepted: August 18, 2022; Published: November 1, 2022  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Horák, I., & Marada, P. (2022). Economic Evaluation of the Selected Ecologically Significant Element in Agriculture. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 70(4-5), 295-306. doi: 10.11118/actaun.2022.022
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. ATKINSON, G. and MOURATO, S. 2008. Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 33: 317-344. Go to original source...
    2. BOUMA, J. A. and VAN BEUKERING, P. J. H. 2015. Ecosystem Services: From Concept to Practice. Cambridge, UK.: Cambridge University Press Go to original source...
    3. BOYD, J. and BANZHAF, S. 2007. What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics, 63(2-3): 616-626. Go to original source...
    4. BRAAT, L. C. and DE GROOT, R. 2012. The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy. Ecosystem Services, 1(1): 4-15. Go to original source...
    5. CONSTANZA, R., D'ARGE, R., DE GROOT, R., FARBER, S., GRASSO, M., HANNON, B., NAEEM, S., LIMBURG, K., PARUELO, J., O'NEIL, R. V., RASKIN, R., SUTTON, P. and VAN DEN BELT, M. 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387: 253-260. Go to original source...
    6. CONSTANZA, R., DE GROOT, R., BRAAT, L., KUBISZEWSKI, I., FIORAMONTI, L., SUTTON, P., FARBER, S. and GRASSO, M. 2017. Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosystem Services, 28(Part A): 1-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.008 Go to original source...
    7. CZECH REPUBLIC. 2014. Government Regulation of 8 December 2014 on determining the details of land use records according to user relations as amended by Government Decree No. 61/2016 Coll., No. 407/2016 Coll. and No. 312/2017 Coll. No. 307/2014. In: Collection of Laws. Czech Republic.
    8. DALY, H. E. 1996. Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development. Boston: Beacon Press. ISBN 9780807047095
    9. DAILY, G. 1997. Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Washington DC: Island Press.
    10. DE GROOT, R., BRANDER, L. and SOLOMONIDES, S. 2020. Ecosystem Services Valuation Database (ESVD). Version December 2020.
    11. DE GROOT, R., FISHER, B., CHRISTIE, M., ARONSON, J., BRAAT, L., GOWDY, J., HAINES-YOUNG, R., MALTBY, E., NEUVILLE, A., POLASKY, S., PORTELA, R. and RING, I. 2010. Integrating the ecological and economic dimensions in biodiversity and ecosystem service valuation. In: KUMAR, P. (Ed.). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic Foundations. London: Earthscan, Routledge. pp. 3-40 TEEB.
    12. EAGRI. 2021. Soil [in Czech: Půda]. eAgri [online]. Available at: https://eagri.cz/public/web/mze/puda/ochrana-pudy-a-krajiny/degradace-pud/vodni-eroze-pudy/ [Accessed: 2021, October 6]
    13. ETTER, H. 2016. Land degradation: an Economic Perspective. In: Land Restoration: Reclaiming Landscapes for a Sustainable Future. Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-801231-4.00024-0 Go to original source...
    14. EUROPEAN COMMISSION. 2008. Guide to Cost-Benefit Analysis of Investment Projects. Structural Funds, Cohesion Fund and Instrument for Pre-Accession. Final Report. Directorate General Regional Policy, European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/guides/cost/guide2008_en.pdf [Accessed: 2021, October 5].
    15. EUROPEAN COMMISSION. 2020. Key policy objectives of the new CAP. 2020. European Commission [online]. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/key-policies/common-agricultural-policy/new-cap-2023-27/key-policy-objectives-new-cap_en [Accessed: 2021, August 18]
    16. EUROPEAN COMMISSION. 2021. The new common agricultural policy: 2023-27. European Commission [online]. Available at: https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/common-agricultural-policy/cap-overview/new-cap-2023-27_en#legalbases [Accessed: 2021, December 5]
    17. EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS. 2020. Biodiversity on farmland: CAP contribution has not halted the decline. Special Report. European Court of Auditors. Available at: https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR20_13/SR_Biodiversity_on_farmland_EN.pdf [Accessed: 2021, August 25]
    18. FISHER, B., TURNER, R. K. and MORLING, P. 2009. Defining and classifying ekosystém services for decision making. Ecological Economics, 68(3): 643-653. Go to original source...
    19. FRÉLICHOVÁ, J., VAČKÁŘ, D., PÁRTL, A., LOUČKOVÁ, B., V. HARMÁČKOVÁ, Z. and LORENCOVÁ, E. 2014. Integrated assessment of ecosystem services in the Czech Republic. Ecosystem Services, 8: 110-117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.03.001 Go to original source...
    20. HORÁK, I. 2020. The Environmental Goods in Agriculture in the Region of South Moravia and their Economic Evaluation. In: PEFnet 2020. 24th European Scientific Conference of Doctoral Students. Brno: Mendel University in Brno, pp. 67-68. ISBN 978-80-7509-749-1
    21. HOUŠKA, J., ČERVENKA, J., KULIHOVÁ, M., BOROVEC, R., KAMENÍČKOVÁ, I., MARADA, P., DUMBROVSKÝ, M. and WEGER, J. 2020. Do Agroforestry Systems and Landscape Features of Non-Production Function Influence the Temperature Regime in the Landscape? Case Study Šardice (South Moravia, Czech Republic) - Preliminary Results. In: Dny o Zemi … o půdě a krajině: sborník konference. 1st Edition. Brno: Mendelova univerzita v Brně, pp. 142-144. ISBN 978-80-7509-766-8
    22. JŮZA, R., ŠIŠÁK, L. 2021. Differentiated evaluation of socio-economic importance of forest services based on their relationship to the market. ZLV, 66(3): 206-212.
    23. KAY, S., GRAVES, A., PALMA, J. H. N., MORENO, G., ROCES-DÍAZ, J. V., AVIRON, S., CHOUVARDAS, D., CROUS-DURAN, J., FERREIRO-DOMÍNGUEZ, N., GARCÍA DE JALÓN, S., MACICASAN, V., MOSQUERA-LOSADA, M. R., PANTERA, A., SANTIAGO-FREIJANES, J. J., SZERENCSITS, E., TORRALBA, M., BURGESS, P. J. and HERZOG, F. 2019. Agroforestry is paying off - Economic evaluation of ecosystem services in European landscapes with and without agroforestry systems. Ecosystem Services, 36: 00896. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100896 Go to original source...
    24. MARADA, P., HAVLÍČEK, Z., KRČÁLOVÁ, E. and SKLÁDANKA, J. 2010. Agroenvironmental management. Certified Methodology. Brno: Mendel University in Brno. ISBN 978-80-7375-415-0
    25. MARADA, P., KŘIKAVA, L. and KŘIKAVA, L. 2012. Analysis of the current state of nature and landscape in the field hunting grounds, the negative effects of intensive agriculture. In: Zvyšování přírodní hodnoty polních honiteb, pp. 7-17. ISBN 978-80-7375-515-7
    26. MARADA, P., CUKOR, J., LINDA, R., VACEK, Z., VACEK, S. and HAVRÁNEK, F. 2019. Extensive orchards in the agricultural landscape: Effective protection against fraying damage caused by roe deer. Sustainability, 11(13): 3738. DOI: 10.3390/su11133738 Go to original source...
    27. MARADA, P. 2011. Negative agriculture impacts to game management and possibilities of their reduction [in Czech: Negativní vlivy zemědělství na myslivost a možnosti jejich snížení]. Myslivost, 59/89(4): 30-32.
    28. MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE. 2021. Strategic Plan of the Common Policy for the period 2023-2027 for the Czech Republic version for informal consultations with the EC, inter-ministerial comment procedure and comments of social and economic partners. Ministry of Agriculture. Available at: https://eagri.cz/public/web/file/686224/SP_SZP____verze_do_MPR_a_EK_cistopis.pdf [Accessed: 2021, October 19]
    29. NATURE CONSERVATION AGENCY OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC (NCA CR). 2016. Planting of fruit trees in the agricultural landscape. SPPK C02 003:2016. Brno: Nature Conservation Agency of the Czech Republic.
    30. RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION (VÚMOP). 2021. Soil in Numbers [in Czech: Půda v číslech]. [Online]. Available at: https://statistiky.vumop.cz/?core=account [Accessed: 2021, October 6]
    31. SMITH, H. F. and SULLIVAN, C. A. 2014. Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes-Farmers' perceptions. Ecological Economics, 98: 72-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.12.008 Go to original source...
    32. SWINTON, S. M., RECTOR, N., ROBERSTON, G. P., JOLEJOLE-FOREMAN, M. C. B. and LUPI, F. 2014. Farmer decisions about adopting environmentally beneficial practices. In: HAMILTON, S. K., DOLL, J. E. and ROBERTSON, G. P. (Eds.). The Ecology of Agricultural Ecosystems: Long-Term Research on the Path to Sustainability. Oxford University Press. Forthcoming.
    33. TEIXEIRA, H. M., VERMUE, A. J., CARDOSO, I. M., CLAROS, M. P. and BIANCHI, F. J. J. A. 2018. Farmers show complex and contrasting perceptions on ecosystem services and their management. Ecosystem Services, 33(Part A): 44-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.08.006 Go to original source...
    34. WAINAINA, P., GITUKU, E. and MINANG, P. 2020. An exploratory study of cost-benefit analysis of landscape restoration. Working Paper number 306. Nairobi, Kenya: World Agroforestry. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5716/WP20014.PDF Go to original source...
    35. WETZEL, A., CASAGRANDE, M., CELETTE, F., JEAN-FRANÇOIS, V., FERRER, A. and PEIGNÉ, J. 2014. Agroecological practices for sustainable agriculture. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 34: 1-20. DOI: 10.1007/s13593-013-0180-7 Go to original source...
    36. ŽALUD, Z., TRNKA, M. and HLAVINKA, P. 2020. Agricultural drought in the Czech Republic - development, impacts and adaptation [in Czech: Zemědělské sucho v české republice - vývoj, dopady a adaptace]. Praha: AK ČR.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content