Korean Journal of Organic Agriculture (한국유기농업학회지)

Korean Association of Organic Agriculture (한국유기농업학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Measuring Farmers' Willingness to Accept of Direct Payment for Increasing Public Benefit

공익기능 증진 직접지불의 농가수용의사금액 측정

  • 김세혁 (경북대학교 농업과학기술연구소) ;
  • 채홍기 (경북대학교 농업경제학과) ;
  • 김태균 (경북대학교 농업경제학과)
  • Received : 2020.02.07
  • Accepted : 2020.07.20
  • Published : 2020.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to estimate farmers' willingness to accept (WTA) of direct payment for increasing public benefit using the contingent valuation method. The double-bounded dichotomous choice and the open-ended question were used to measure WTAs for basic form and optional form, respectively. The results show that WTA for basic form was inversely proportional to the acreage. WTAs were KRW 1,694,001 with 2 ha or less, KRW 1,617,789 with over 2 ha~6 ha, and KRW 1,562,977 with over 6 ha. The results also indicate that WTAs for optional form are similar to payments of agricultural environmental conservation program except physical (chemical) control of pests and weed. The results of this study can provide useful information for the establishment of direct payment for increasing public benefit.

Keywords

References

  1. Bishop, R. C. and T. A. Herberlein. 1979. Measuring values of extramarket goods: Are indirect measures biased?. Am. J. Agric. 61(5): 926-930. https://doi.org/10.2307/3180348
  2. EPRS. 2016. Common Agricultural Policy 2014-2020: Direct payments. European Parliamentary Research Service. European Union Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.2861/289046.
  3. Freeman, A. M., J. A. Herriges, and C. L. Kling. 2014. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Value: Theory and Methods. New York: Resources for the Future. pp. 40-76.
  4. Hanemann, W. M., J. Loomis, and B. Kanninen. 1991. Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation. Am. J. Agric. 73(4): 1255-1263. https://doi.org/10.2307/1242453
  5. Ji, I. B., O. S. Kwon, W. J. Song, J. N. Kim, and Y. G. Lee. 2014. Estimating Willingness to Pay for Livestock Industry Support Policies to Solve Livestock’s Externality Problems in Korea. Journal of Rural Development. 37(4): 97-116.
  6. Kang, M, Y. 2018. Reorganizing Direct Payment Program for Environment-friendly Agriculture in Chungnam According to the Change of Agricultural Environmental Policy. Research Report. pp. 74-103. ChungNam Institute.
  7. Kim, T. H., C. H. Rhew, M. S. Jung, N. W. Oh, and J. Y. Park. 2018. Enlargement and Reform of Public Benefit Direct Payment System-Detailed Plan for Reform of Agricultural Direct Payment System. Research Report. pp. 69-201. Korea Rural Economic Institute.
  8. Kim, T. Y. and M. S. Bae. 2019. The Implication and Challenge of Public Benefit Direct Payment. Agricultural Policy. 69: 60-106. Center for Food, Agricultural & Rural Policy.
  9. Kim, T. Y., J. B. Im, and J. H. Lee. 2017. Measures for Sustainable Agriculture: Public Benefit Direct Payment. Research Report. 234: 1-16. GS&J Institute.
  10. Lim. Y. A. and J. W. Cho. 2017. Study on the Introduction of Agricultural Environment Conservation Programs. Research Report. pp. 71-108. Korea Rural Economic Institute.
  11. Lee, C. K. and T. K. Kim. 2017. Measuring the Economic Value of Experience in the Seoul Lantern Festival Using the Contingent Valuation Method with a Follow-up Question. International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research. 31(3): 5-19.
  12. Lee, D. H., S. Y. Kim, and Y. M. Lee. 2016. An Evaluation of the Socio-economic Value of Rural Community Business : A case of Gyeongnam-Do. Korean Journal of Agricultural Management and Policy. 43(2): 370-398
  13. MAFF. 2014. Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Japan. Available from https://www.maff.go.jp/e/policies/env/sustainagri/directpay.html [cited 23 January 2020]
  14. MAFRA. 2019. Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affair. Inside Data.
  15. Mitchell, R. C. and R. T. Carson. 1989. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington D.C: Resource for the Future.
  16. OECD. 2017. The Political Economy of Biodiversity Policy Reform. OECD Publishing. Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264269545-en.
  17. Tobin, J. 1958. Esitmation of Relationship for Limited Dependent Variables. Economertrica, 26: 24-36. https://doi.org/10.2307/1907382
  18. USDA. 2017. Environmental Benefits of the US CRP 2017. United States Department of Agriculture. USA. Available from https://www.fsa.usda.gov/pr-ograms-and-services/economicand-policy-analysis/natural-resources-analysis/crp-benefits/index [cited 23 January 2020]