Evaluations of agri-environmental schemes based on observational farm data: The importance of covariate selection

被引:9
作者
Uehleke, Reinhard [1 ]
Petrick, Martin [2 ]
Huettel, Silke [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bonn, Prod Econ Grp, Meckenheimer Allee 174, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
[2] Justus Liebig Univ Giessen, Professorship Agr Food & Environm Policy, Senckenbergerstr 3, D-35390 Giessen, Germany
关键词
Policy impact evaluation; Agri-environmental schemes; DID matching; Kernel matching; Covariate selection; PROPENSITY SCORE; VARIABLE SELECTION; CAUSAL INFERENCE; IMPACT; PARTICIPATION; INDICATORS; EU; BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION; PRODUCTIVITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105950
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Evaluations of agri-environmental schemes (AES) based on observational farm data generally use a matching algorithm for comparing participating and non-participating farms. To mitigate the potential post-matching covariate imbalances between groups resulting from the use of large covariate sets, this paper proposes a method mix that reduces the covariate set and maximises the utilised number of observations. We test the approach on an evaluation of the European Union's AES in the programming period of 2000-2006, estimating the impacts of AES participation on typical measures of land management, i.e. fertiliser and plant protection expenditures and grassland share. We use Mahalanobis distance matching with exact matching on the entry year of the participating farms and kernel matching with automated bandwidth selection to maximise the utilised sample and increase the estimator's efficiency. Combining cause-and-effect path analysis with statistical covariate selection algorithms reduces the covariate set and improves balance on the characteristics that describe the production environment, farming intensity, productivity, and farmers' preferences. We find that AES generate moderate decreases in plant protection expenditure and moderate increases in grassland shares. We conclude that our proposed method mix ensures an efficient use of information and improves the reliability of AES impact evaluation.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 91 条
  • [1] Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects
    Abadie, A
    Imbens, GW
    [J]. ECONOMETRICA, 2006, 74 (01) : 235 - 267
  • [2] Semiparametric difference-in-differences estimators
    Abadie, A
    [J]. REVIEW OF ECONOMIC STUDIES, 2005, 72 (01) : 1 - 19
  • [3] Econometric Methods for Program Evaluation
    Abadie, Alberto
    Cattaneo, Matias D.
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF ECONOMICS, VOL 10, 2018, 10 : 465 - 503
  • [4] Ahn S., 2000, Econometric Reviews, V19, P461, DOI DOI 10.1080/07474930008800482
  • [5] Arata L, 2016, LAND ECON, V92, P167, DOI 10.3368/le.92.1.167
  • [6] Measuring sustainable intensification: Combining composite indicators and efficiency analysis to account for positive externalities in cereal production
    Areal, Francisco J.
    Jones, Philip J.
    Mortimer, Simon R.
    Wilson, Paul
    [J]. LAND USE POLICY, 2018, 75 : 314 - 326
  • [7] Baldoni E, 2017, BIO-BASED APPL ECON, V6, P119, DOI 10.13128/BAE-19112
  • [8] Leverage Points for Governing Agricultural Soils: A Review of Empirical Studies of European Farmers' Decision-Making
    Bartkowski, Bartosz
    Bartke, Stephan
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY, 2018, 10 (09)
  • [9] Mainstreaming Impact Evaluation in Nature Conservation
    Baylis, Kathy
    Honey-Roses, Jordi
    Borner, Jan
    Corbera, Esteve
    Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss
    Ferraro, Paul J.
    Lapeyre, Renaud
    Persson, U. Martin
    Pfaff, Alex
    Wunder, Sven
    [J]. CONSERVATION LETTERS, 2016, 9 (01): : 58 - 64
  • [10] Present agri-environment measures in Europe are not sufficient for the conservation of a highly sensitive bird species, the Corncrake Crex crex
    Bellebaum, Jochen
    Koffijberg, Kees
    [J]. AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT, 2018, 257 : 30 - 37