Next Article in Journal
Drivers and Barriers to Clean Cooking: A Systematic Literature Review from a Consumer Behavior Perspective
Next Article in Special Issue
Reviewing Counterfactual Analyses to Assess Impacts of EU Rural Development Programmes: What Lessons Can Be Learned from the 2007–2013 Ex-Post Evaluations?
Previous Article in Journal
Why Do Sustainable Ventures Fail to Attract Management Talent?
Previous Article in Special Issue
Heterogeneous Preferences for Public Goods Provided by Agriculture in a Region of Intensive Agricultural Production: The Case of the Marchfeld
Open AccessArticle

AES Impact Evaluation With Integrated Farm Data: Combining Statistical Matching and Propensity Score Matching

1
Department of Statistical Sciences “P. Fortunati”, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, Via delle Belle Arti 41, 40126 Bologna, Italy
2
Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum University of Bologna, Viale Fanin 50, 40127 Bologna, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2018, 10(11), 4320; https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114320
Received: 5 October 2018 / Revised: 14 November 2018 / Accepted: 18 November 2018 / Published: 21 November 2018
A large share of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is allocated to agri-environmental schemes (AESs), whose goal is to foster the provision of a wide range of environmental public goods. Despite this effort, little is known on the actual environmental and economic impact of the AESs, due to the non-experimental conditions of the assessment exercise and several data availability issues. The main objective of the paper is to explore the feasibility of combining the non-parametric statistical matching (SM) method and propensity score matching (PSM) counterfactual approach analysis and to test its usefulness and practicability on a case study represented by selected impacts of the AESs in Emilia-Romagna. The work hints at the potentialities of the combined use of SM and PSM as well as of the systematic collection of additional information to be included in EU-financed project surveys in order to enrich and complete data collected in the official statistics. The results show that the combination of the two methods enables us to enlarge and deepen the scope of counterfactual analysis applied to AESs. In a specific case study, AESs seem to reduce the amount of rent-in land and decrease the crop mix diversity. View Full-Text
Keywords: agri-environmental schemes; public goods; statistical matching; data integration; propensity score matching agri-environmental schemes; public goods; statistical matching; data integration; propensity score matching
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

D’Alberto, R.; Zavalloni, M.; Raggi, M.; Viaggi, D. AES Impact Evaluation With Integrated Farm Data: Combining Statistical Matching and Propensity Score Matching. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4320.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop