评估农场可持续性的框架

Hrabrin Bachev Храбрин Башев
{"title":"评估农场可持续性的框架","authors":"Hrabrin Bachev Храбрин Башев","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.903484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The traditional approach for assessing farm sustainability (based on indicators of “productivity”, “profitability”, and “financial dependency”) fails to explain why there exist highly sustainable farms with different levels of “efficiency” such as low productive subsistent and part-time farming, non-for profit and cooperative enterprises, small commercial farms and large agro-corporations, etc. In this paper we adapt the New Institutional and Transaction Costs Economics perspective to agrarian sphere, and suggest a new framework for assessing sustainability of farms and farm structures. Firstly, an analysis is made on various approaches for defining sustainability of agricultural systems: as “an ideology”, as “a set of strategies”, as “the ability to fulfill a set of goals”, and as “ability to continue”. The “problem of sustainability” in the economic model (mainly associated with “negative externalities”, “tragedy of commons”, “jointness of farm production”) is also presented, and the “institutional” solutions of that problem discussed. Second, we prove that analysis of institutions and transacting costs is important for proper understanding the farms sustainability. Institutional environment is the crucial factor, which determines the restrictions and costs of farm activities, and eventually - the level of sustainability of different farm organizations. In the specific institutional setting, agrarian agents use (or develop) a great variety of effective (cost economizing) market and non-market modes for governing of their exchanges. Therefore, studying the farm as a governance (rather than production) structure is the key for understanding the farm efficiency and sustainability. Third, we define sustainability of farm as a state when it manages all transactions in the most economical way – that is the situation when there exist no transaction, which could be carried out with net benefit. When a farm experiences high costs and difficulties meeting institutional restrictions and carrying out transactions, comparing to other feasible modes, it will be unsustainable. That is because there will be strong incentives for exploring the existing potential (adapting to sustainable state) through reduction or enlargement of farm size, or via reorganization or liquidation of the farm. Thus the farm potential for adaptation to changing (market, institutional, technological etc.) environment is to be the main indicator for farm sustainability. Furthermore, the most effective form for organization of farm transactions will depend on individuals’ characteristics (preferences, entrepreneurial abilities, risk aversion etc.) and specific attributes of each transaction (uncertainty, frequency, assets specificity, and appropriability). Consequently, effective farms of different type and size could persist (sustain) in agriculture. Finally, we develop a principle matrix with the effective modes for governing of agrarian sustainability. Discrete structural analysis is used to define the transactions for which market, contract, and integral forms are efficient (sustainable). We also determine the situation(s), where there is strong need for a third-party public involvement in agrarian sphere - that is for transactions with low appropriablity, and high uncertainty and asset specificity. In later case, there are no sustainable market and private modes to organize such transactions effectively (e.g. supply of environmental goods). Next, we specify the spectrum of possible public forms for intervention in market and private transactions - assistance, regulation, hybrid and in-house organization, international cooperation, property rights and institutional modernization. The comparative efficiency of feasible modes for public involvement is to be assessed taking into account the overall costs and benefits. Sustainable agrarian development is compromised when both market and private forms fails, and no effective public intervention takes place.","PeriodicalId":442192,"journal":{"name":"GeographyRN: Political Ecology (Topic)","volume":"163 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"49","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Framework for Assessing Sustainability of Farms\",\"authors\":\"Hrabrin Bachev Храбрин Башев\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.903484\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The traditional approach for assessing farm sustainability (based on indicators of “productivity”, “profitability”, and “financial dependency”) fails to explain why there exist highly sustainable farms with different levels of “efficiency” such as low productive subsistent and part-time farming, non-for profit and cooperative enterprises, small commercial farms and large agro-corporations, etc. In this paper we adapt the New Institutional and Transaction Costs Economics perspective to agrarian sphere, and suggest a new framework for assessing sustainability of farms and farm structures. Firstly, an analysis is made on various approaches for defining sustainability of agricultural systems: as “an ideology”, as “a set of strategies”, as “the ability to fulfill a set of goals”, and as “ability to continue”. The “problem of sustainability” in the economic model (mainly associated with “negative externalities”, “tragedy of commons”, “jointness of farm production”) is also presented, and the “institutional” solutions of that problem discussed. Second, we prove that analysis of institutions and transacting costs is important for proper understanding the farms sustainability. Institutional environment is the crucial factor, which determines the restrictions and costs of farm activities, and eventually - the level of sustainability of different farm organizations. In the specific institutional setting, agrarian agents use (or develop) a great variety of effective (cost economizing) market and non-market modes for governing of their exchanges. Therefore, studying the farm as a governance (rather than production) structure is the key for understanding the farm efficiency and sustainability. Third, we define sustainability of farm as a state when it manages all transactions in the most economical way – that is the situation when there exist no transaction, which could be carried out with net benefit. When a farm experiences high costs and difficulties meeting institutional restrictions and carrying out transactions, comparing to other feasible modes, it will be unsustainable. That is because there will be strong incentives for exploring the existing potential (adapting to sustainable state) through reduction or enlargement of farm size, or via reorganization or liquidation of the farm. Thus the farm potential for adaptation to changing (market, institutional, technological etc.) environment is to be the main indicator for farm sustainability. Furthermore, the most effective form for organization of farm transactions will depend on individuals’ characteristics (preferences, entrepreneurial abilities, risk aversion etc.) and specific attributes of each transaction (uncertainty, frequency, assets specificity, and appropriability). Consequently, effective farms of different type and size could persist (sustain) in agriculture. Finally, we develop a principle matrix with the effective modes for governing of agrarian sustainability. Discrete structural analysis is used to define the transactions for which market, contract, and integral forms are efficient (sustainable). We also determine the situation(s), where there is strong need for a third-party public involvement in agrarian sphere - that is for transactions with low appropriablity, and high uncertainty and asset specificity. In later case, there are no sustainable market and private modes to organize such transactions effectively (e.g. supply of environmental goods). Next, we specify the spectrum of possible public forms for intervention in market and private transactions - assistance, regulation, hybrid and in-house organization, international cooperation, property rights and institutional modernization. The comparative efficiency of feasible modes for public involvement is to be assessed taking into account the overall costs and benefits. Sustainable agrarian development is compromised when both market and private forms fails, and no effective public intervention takes place.\",\"PeriodicalId\":442192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"GeographyRN: Political Ecology (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"163 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"49\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"GeographyRN: Political Ecology (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.903484\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GeographyRN: Political Ecology (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.903484","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 49

摘要

评估农场可持续性的传统方法(基于“生产力”、“盈利能力”和“财务依赖性”指标)无法解释为什么存在具有不同“效率”水平的高度可持续性农场,如低生产率的自给自足和兼职农业、非营利性和合作企业、小型商业农场和大型农业公司等。本文将新制度和交易成本经济学的观点应用于农业领域,并提出了一个评估农场和农场结构可持续性的新框架。首先,对定义农业系统可持续性的各种方法进行了分析:作为“一种意识形态”,作为“一套战略”,作为“实现一套目标的能力”,以及作为“持续能力”。本文还提出了经济模型中的“可持续性问题”(主要与“负外部性”、“公地悲剧”、“农业生产的联合性”有关),并讨论了该问题的“制度”解决方案。其次,我们证明了制度和交易成本的分析对于正确理解农场的可持续性是重要的。制度环境是关键因素,它决定了农业活动的限制和成本,并最终决定了不同农业组织的可持续性水平。在特定的制度环境中,农业代理人使用(或发展)各种有效的(节约成本的)市场和非市场模式来管理他们的交换。因此,将农场作为一个治理(而不是生产)结构来研究是理解农场效率和可持续性的关键。第三,我们将农场的可持续性定义为一种以最经济的方式管理所有交易的状态——即不存在任何交易的情况,这些交易可以以净收益进行。与其他可行模式相比,当一个农场成本高、难以满足制度限制和开展交易时,它将是不可持续的。这是因为,通过缩小或扩大农场规模,或通过重组或清算农场,将有很强的动机来探索现有潜力(适应可持续状态)。因此,农场适应变化(市场、制度、技术等)环境的潜力将成为农场可持续性的主要指标。此外,最有效的农业交易组织形式将取决于个人的特征(偏好、创业能力、风险规避等)和每笔交易的特定属性(不确定性、频率、资产特异性和可占用性)。因此,不同类型和规模的有效农场可以在农业中持续存在。最后,我们建立了一个具有有效治理模式的原则矩阵。离散结构分析用于定义市场、合同和整体形式有效(可持续)的交易。我们还确定了迫切需要第三方公众参与农业领域的情况,即适合性低、不确定性和资产专用性高的交易。在后一种情况下,没有可持续的市场和私人模式来有效地组织这种交易(例如,环境产品的供应)。接下来,我们详细说明了干预市场和私人交易的各种可能的公共形式——援助、监管、混合和内部组织、国际合作、产权和制度现代化。公众参与的可行模式的相对效率将在考虑总成本和收益的情况下进行评估。当市场和私人形式都失败,没有有效的公共干预时,可持续的农业发展就会受到损害。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Framework for Assessing Sustainability of Farms
The traditional approach for assessing farm sustainability (based on indicators of “productivity”, “profitability”, and “financial dependency”) fails to explain why there exist highly sustainable farms with different levels of “efficiency” such as low productive subsistent and part-time farming, non-for profit and cooperative enterprises, small commercial farms and large agro-corporations, etc. In this paper we adapt the New Institutional and Transaction Costs Economics perspective to agrarian sphere, and suggest a new framework for assessing sustainability of farms and farm structures. Firstly, an analysis is made on various approaches for defining sustainability of agricultural systems: as “an ideology”, as “a set of strategies”, as “the ability to fulfill a set of goals”, and as “ability to continue”. The “problem of sustainability” in the economic model (mainly associated with “negative externalities”, “tragedy of commons”, “jointness of farm production”) is also presented, and the “institutional” solutions of that problem discussed. Second, we prove that analysis of institutions and transacting costs is important for proper understanding the farms sustainability. Institutional environment is the crucial factor, which determines the restrictions and costs of farm activities, and eventually - the level of sustainability of different farm organizations. In the specific institutional setting, agrarian agents use (or develop) a great variety of effective (cost economizing) market and non-market modes for governing of their exchanges. Therefore, studying the farm as a governance (rather than production) structure is the key for understanding the farm efficiency and sustainability. Third, we define sustainability of farm as a state when it manages all transactions in the most economical way – that is the situation when there exist no transaction, which could be carried out with net benefit. When a farm experiences high costs and difficulties meeting institutional restrictions and carrying out transactions, comparing to other feasible modes, it will be unsustainable. That is because there will be strong incentives for exploring the existing potential (adapting to sustainable state) through reduction or enlargement of farm size, or via reorganization or liquidation of the farm. Thus the farm potential for adaptation to changing (market, institutional, technological etc.) environment is to be the main indicator for farm sustainability. Furthermore, the most effective form for organization of farm transactions will depend on individuals’ characteristics (preferences, entrepreneurial abilities, risk aversion etc.) and specific attributes of each transaction (uncertainty, frequency, assets specificity, and appropriability). Consequently, effective farms of different type and size could persist (sustain) in agriculture. Finally, we develop a principle matrix with the effective modes for governing of agrarian sustainability. Discrete structural analysis is used to define the transactions for which market, contract, and integral forms are efficient (sustainable). We also determine the situation(s), where there is strong need for a third-party public involvement in agrarian sphere - that is for transactions with low appropriablity, and high uncertainty and asset specificity. In later case, there are no sustainable market and private modes to organize such transactions effectively (e.g. supply of environmental goods). Next, we specify the spectrum of possible public forms for intervention in market and private transactions - assistance, regulation, hybrid and in-house organization, international cooperation, property rights and institutional modernization. The comparative efficiency of feasible modes for public involvement is to be assessed taking into account the overall costs and benefits. Sustainable agrarian development is compromised when both market and private forms fails, and no effective public intervention takes place.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信