Special Issue "Agricultural Policy and Farmer Behavior"

A special issue of Agriculture (ISSN 2077-0472). This special issue belongs to the section "Agricultural Economics, Policies and Rural Management".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 15 July 2021.

Special Issue Editors

Prof. Gordon Rausser
E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, University of California, Berkeley, 510,341 Berkeley, USA.
Interests: global agriculture and food policy
Prof. WIlliam Foster
E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Agricultural Economics, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile,Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Macul, Santiago, Chile
Interests: agricultural policy; rural development; political economy; production economics; welfare economics

Special Issue Information

Agricultural policy is a complex web of interventions, covering output markets, input markets, trade, public good investments, renewable and exhaustible natural resources, the regulation of externalities, education, and the marketing and distribution of food products. In many countries, these interventions have resulted in large fiscal expenditures, in large farm product surpluses, in consequences for the environment, and benefits to special interests that are often highly concentrated. In some instances, such policies have resulted in spectacular productivity increases, and in other instances, they have led to stagnation and poverty. In this Special Issue, leading scholars explore the various ways in which agricultural policies might influence farm behavior and the consequences of those policies for agricultural productivity, the food supply chain, farm and rural household welfare, the use of farm inputs and labor, and environmental sustainability.

Prof. Gordon Rausser
Prof. WIlliam Foster
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Agriculture is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  1. A catalogue of policies:
    1. Interventions to support farmer income:
      1. Border protection;
      2. Subsidies;
      3. Supply restrictions.
    2. R&D;
    3. Infrastructure (irrigation, rural electrification, road networks, telephony, etc.);
    4. Human capital investments;
    5. Other regulations and policies (food safety, invasive species, biofuels, etc., what more?);
    6. Complementarities between different policies.
  2. Farm policy and the supply response:
    1. Farm-level input decisions;
    2. Scale economies;
    3. Composition of production;
    4. The implications for productivity;
    5. The aggregate supply of commodities;
    6. Short-run and long-run farmer decisions and the promise of government support.
  3. Farm policy and rural incomes:
    1. Do some farm households depend on farm subsidies and other policies?
    2. Policy effects on specialization or diversification of household income sources;
    3. Can we rank policies by their efficiency at raising farmer incomes or promoting rural development? (The Gardner question);
  4. Farm policy and farm labor:
    1. The response of household labor decisions;
    2. The effects of policy on migration: internal and foreign.
  5. Policy and risk management in agriculture: lessons learned and forgotten:
    1. How has taxpayer-subsidized crop insurance altered production decisions:
      1. Have subsidies decreased diversification and other moral hazard effects;
      2. Government insurance and farm scale.
    2. Government crop insurance as disguised subsidy and the ways farmers and others might game the system.
  6. Farm policy and unintended consequences:
    1. “Slippage” and other consequences of people taking advantage of incentive structures;
    2. Gaming the system: why policy makers and bureaucrats can never anticipate all the ways a plan can backfire;
    3. Smart versus nonsmart policies: taking into account farmer responses.
  7. The history of the evolution of agricultural policies in the developed world.
  8. Lessons from 75 years of development economics: agricultural policies and farm household welfare.
  9. The role of agricultural policy in the alleviation of poverty.
  10. Farm policy, farmer response, and environmental consequences.
  11. Are food and nutrition policies farm policies?

Published Papers (4 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Article
Adoption of Improved Mungbean Production Technologies in Selected East African Countries
Agriculture 2021, 11(6), 528; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11060528 - 07 Jun 2021
Viewed by 143
Abstract
This study analyzes the factors that influence the probability and extent of the adoption of mungbean production technologies in Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda, using multivariate probit and Poisson regression models. The results show that the probability and extent of the adoption of mungbean [...] Read more.
This study analyzes the factors that influence the probability and extent of the adoption of mungbean production technologies in Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda, using multivariate probit and Poisson regression models. The results show that the probability and extent of the adoption of mungbean production technologies are influenced by gender of the household, household size, farm size, livestock size, household assets, access to extension services and access to credit. The study suggests that policy interventions that aimed at targeting women farmers, increasing household asset and information dissemination, such as field demonstrations and training programs, are crucial in enhancing technology adoption among smallholder farmers. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Agricultural Policy and Farmer Behavior)
Article
Livelihood Adaptation of Rural Households under Livelihood Stress: Evidence from Sichuan Province, China
Agriculture 2021, 11(6), 506; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11060506 - 30 May 2021
Viewed by 464
Abstract
The welfare of many poor and low-income rural households is vulnerable to earthquakes and secondary geological disasters. The academic literature, however, pays little attention to the livelihood pressure, adaptability, and livelihood strategies of these households. Based on the survey data of 327 rural [...] Read more.
The welfare of many poor and low-income rural households is vulnerable to earthquakes and secondary geological disasters. The academic literature, however, pays little attention to the livelihood pressure, adaptability, and livelihood strategies of these households. Based on the survey data of 327 rural households in the Wenchuan and Lushan earthquake-stricken areas in the Sichuan Province, the livelihood pressure, adaptability, and livelihood strategy characteristics of rural households were analyzed, and the disordered multi-classification logistic regression model was constructed to explore the correlation between the above-mentioned variables. The results show that: (1) Rural households face the greatest economic pressure and the least social pressure; rural households have the strongest adaptability in social capital and the lowest adaptability in financial capital. The proportion of rural households that chose the aid livelihood strategy was the highest, while the proportion of rural households that chose the adjustment livelihood strategy was the lowest. (2) Compared with the expanded livelihood strategy, (a) When the health pressure is higher, the rural households are more inclined to choose the expanded livelihood strategy, followed by the contractive livelihood strategy and, finally, the aid livelihood strategies; (b), the higher the physical capital, the more often the rural households tend to choose the expanded livelihood strategy compared to the adjustment livelihood strategy; (c), The higher the financial capital of farm households, the more they prefer contractive livelihood strategies compared to the expanded livelihood strategy and (d), compared with the aid livelihood strategy, rural households with greater economic pressure are more inclined to choose the expanded livelihood strategy.This study can provide a reference for the establishment of relevant policies related to the adaptation capacity of rural households in the earthquake hazard zone. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Agricultural Policy and Farmer Behavior)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Regional Differences in Benefits from the EU Common Agricultural Policy in Poland and Their Policy Implications
Agriculture 2021, 11(4), 288; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11040288 - 27 Mar 2021
Viewed by 509
Abstract
Although the beneficial impact of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) on the stabilization on farming income is undisputable, the distribution of benefits derived from the CAP between operators and regions gives rise to some controversy. The objective of this paper was to estimate regional [...] Read more.
Although the beneficial impact of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) on the stabilization on farming income is undisputable, the distribution of benefits derived from the CAP between operators and regions gives rise to some controversy. The objective of this paper was to estimate regional differences in the benefits derived from the Common Agricultural Policy in Poland based on the partial equilibrium model of the European Union (EU) agricultural sector with simulated interventions. The expectations of farmers from different regions of Poland were represented as a non-cooperative game to define vectors of change in the agricultural policy. The theory of moves was applied to set the game between different groups of farmers. Our results demonstrate that both the 1st and the 2nd pillars of the CAP were more profitable to farmers from regions with a more advantageous agrarian structure and a higher agricultural potential compared to their peers from the regions with a fragmented agriculture. However, considering long-term development objectives of the Polish agriculture, the theory of moves outcome argues against compensating for these differences by increasing redistributive payments to farmers in less favorable regions. To prevent widening of regional differences and ensure the social and economic development of rural areas in regions with less favorable agrarian structures where agriculture is currently unable to compete, it would be critical to enhance conditions for alternative types of economic activities. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Agricultural Policy and Farmer Behavior)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Does Income Inequality Impair Health? Evidence from Rural China
Agriculture 2021, 11(3), 203; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11030203 - 02 Mar 2021
Viewed by 470
Abstract
In the context of the Healthy China strategy and the targeted poverty alleviation policy, based on the survey data of 1710 apple planters in Shandong, Yunnan, Shaanxi, and Gansu provinces, we selected the Probit model and the mediating effect test model to analyze [...] Read more.
In the context of the Healthy China strategy and the targeted poverty alleviation policy, based on the survey data of 1710 apple planters in Shandong, Yunnan, Shaanxi, and Gansu provinces, we selected the Probit model and the mediating effect test model to analyze the impact of income inequality on the self-rated health of farmers in this paper. The main results are as follows: First, income inequality within villages and townships had a significant negative impact on self-rated health, with both showing inverted U-shaped relationships, while income inequality within counties had no significant impact on self-rated health. Second, income inequality can impact the health of farmers, in terms of tobacco and alcohol behaviors, social trust, and sense of relative deprivation, where the mediating effect ratio of these three factors combined accounted for 32.4% of the total effect. Furthermore, the effect of income inequality on health was heterogeneous among different income groups, where the negative impact of income inequality on the self-rated health of the high-income group was less than that of the low-income group, indicating that an increase in income inequality serves to aggravate the degree of health inequality. Therefore, the government should adopt differentiated policies to improve the health of farmers. In rural areas with high income inequality, the government should focus on increasing the income of low-income groups, guide them to develop a healthy lifestyle, improve their social trust, and reduce their sense of relative deprivation. In rural areas where incomes are generally low, the government should first guide qualified farmers to become rich, then encourage others to become rich later. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Agricultural Policy and Farmer Behavior)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop