2014-2018 年奥地利两项农业环境计划的反事实评估

IF 4.5 3区 经济学 Q1 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY
Reinhard Uehleke, Heidi Leonhardt, Silke Hüttel
{"title":"2014-2018 年奥地利两项农业环境计划的反事实评估","authors":"Reinhard Uehleke,&nbsp;Heidi Leonhardt,&nbsp;Silke Hüttel","doi":"10.1111/agec.12805","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article investigates the causal effect of farm participation in two Austrian agri-environmental schemes (AES), Immergrün (<i>ground cover</i>) and Zwischenfrucht (<i>catch cropping</i>), on fertilizer and plant protection expenditures in the 2014 programming period. Combining European Farm Accountancy Data Network data with information on scheme participation from administrative control data offers identifying farm participation in specific schemes targeted at reducing input intensity. Given the overall small sample, we maximized the utilizable sample size by combining difference-in-difference and kernel matching with automated bandwidth selection. To address the remaining post-matching covariate imbalances, we used double machine learning (DML) techniques for a guided selection of potential confounding covariates. Our results suggest that, given the available sample, we cannot substantiate moderate effects of AES participation, and that guided covariate selection by DML offers no gain over non-guided covariate selection for the small sample. Our results underline the need to increase the number of farms and the duration in available farm panels to substantiate future counterfactual-based evaluations of policy.</p>","PeriodicalId":50837,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Economics","volume":"55 1","pages":"27-40"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/agec.12805","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Counterfactual evaluation of two Austrian agri-environmental schemes in 2014–2018\",\"authors\":\"Reinhard Uehleke,&nbsp;Heidi Leonhardt,&nbsp;Silke Hüttel\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/agec.12805\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This article investigates the causal effect of farm participation in two Austrian agri-environmental schemes (AES), Immergrün (<i>ground cover</i>) and Zwischenfrucht (<i>catch cropping</i>), on fertilizer and plant protection expenditures in the 2014 programming period. Combining European Farm Accountancy Data Network data with information on scheme participation from administrative control data offers identifying farm participation in specific schemes targeted at reducing input intensity. Given the overall small sample, we maximized the utilizable sample size by combining difference-in-difference and kernel matching with automated bandwidth selection. To address the remaining post-matching covariate imbalances, we used double machine learning (DML) techniques for a guided selection of potential confounding covariates. Our results suggest that, given the available sample, we cannot substantiate moderate effects of AES participation, and that guided covariate selection by DML offers no gain over non-guided covariate selection for the small sample. Our results underline the need to increase the number of farms and the duration in available farm panels to substantiate future counterfactual-based evaluations of policy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agricultural Economics\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"27-40\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/agec.12805\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agricultural Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/agec.12805\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/agec.12805","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文研究了在 2014 年规划期间,农场参与两项奥地利农业环境计划(AES)--Immergrün(地面覆盖)和 Zwischenfrucht(套作)--对化肥和植保支出的因果影响。将欧洲农场会计数据网络数据与行政控制数据中的计划参与信息相结合,可以确定农场是否参与了旨在降低投入强度的特定计划。鉴于总体样本较少,我们通过差分匹配和核匹配与自动带宽选择相结合,最大限度地扩大了可利用的样本量。为了解决剩余的匹配后协变量不平衡问题,我们使用了双重机器学习(DML)技术来引导选择潜在的混杂协变量。我们的研究结果表明,在现有样本条件下,我们无法证实 AES 参与的适度影响,而且在小样本条件下,DML 引导的协变量选择并不比非引导的协变量选择更有效。我们的结果突出表明,有必要增加农场数量并延长现有农场面板的持续时间,以证实未来基于反事实的政策评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Counterfactual evaluation of two Austrian agri-environmental schemes in 2014–2018

Counterfactual evaluation of two Austrian agri-environmental schemes in 2014–2018

This article investigates the causal effect of farm participation in two Austrian agri-environmental schemes (AES), Immergrün (ground cover) and Zwischenfrucht (catch cropping), on fertilizer and plant protection expenditures in the 2014 programming period. Combining European Farm Accountancy Data Network data with information on scheme participation from administrative control data offers identifying farm participation in specific schemes targeted at reducing input intensity. Given the overall small sample, we maximized the utilizable sample size by combining difference-in-difference and kernel matching with automated bandwidth selection. To address the remaining post-matching covariate imbalances, we used double machine learning (DML) techniques for a guided selection of potential confounding covariates. Our results suggest that, given the available sample, we cannot substantiate moderate effects of AES participation, and that guided covariate selection by DML offers no gain over non-guided covariate selection for the small sample. Our results underline the need to increase the number of farms and the duration in available farm panels to substantiate future counterfactual-based evaluations of policy.

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
Agricultural Economics
Agricultural Economics 管理科学-农业经济与政策
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
4.90%
发文量
62
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Agricultural Economics aims to disseminate the most important research results and policy analyses in our discipline, from all regions of the world. Topical coverage ranges from consumption and nutrition to land use and the environment, at every scale of analysis from households to markets and the macro-economy. Applicable methodologies include econometric estimation and statistical hypothesis testing, optimization and simulation models, descriptive reviews and policy analyses. We particularly encourage submission of empirical work that can be replicated and tested by others.
×
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