In this article, we discuss the implementation of two evaluation approaches—the Analytic Hierarchy Process and the cost-effectiveness analysis for political decision-making support in agri-environmental policy. The approaches represent two different ways of evaluation: hierarchical weighting for estimation of immeasurable environmental benefits and effectiveness analysis focused on economic aspects. These methods can be used separately; however, the combination of the approaches in one evaluation system can help to consider different economic and ecological aspects of environmental protection to a wider extent. The main objective of the article is to investigate which agri-environmental measures would be recommended for political strategies to maximize environmental benefits or else to minimize the realization costs of the measures. The investigation is based on results of a case study conducted in voivodship Subcarpathia in Poland including interviews with agricultural experts, agri-environmental advisors and farmers. The results show that the measures ‘Extensive meadow farming’ and ‘Organic farming’ denote the highest environmental benefits with regard to the envisaged environmental objectives defined in the National Agri-environmental Programme 2004–2006. The cost-effectiveness of agri-environmental measures is differentiated depending on the stakeholder group. The results can be helpful to support political decision-making processes considering simultaneously regional priorities of the environmental protection in rural areas.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ARiMR (Agencja Restrukturyzacji i Modernizacji Rolnictwa) (Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture). 2006. ‘Liczba wniosków o wsparcie w ramach programu rolno-œrodowiskowego’ (Applications for financial support from the Agri-Environmental Programme), Unpublished Document. Rzeszow: ARiMR.
2.
Europäische Kommission (European Commission). 1999. ‘ Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1257/1999 des Rates vom 17. Mai 1999 über die Förderung der Entwicklung des ländlichen Raums durch den Europäischen Ausrichtungs- und Garantiefonds für die Landwirtschaft (EAGFL) und zur Änderung bzw. Aufhebung bestimmter Verordnungen’ (Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain regulations.)Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften (Official Journal of the European Union), L 160: 80–102 .
3.
Forman, E.H. and S.I. Gass.2001. ‘ The Analytic Hierarchy Process—An Exposition ’, Operations Research, 49 (4): 469–86 .
4.
Guo, L.S. and Y.S. He.1999. ‘ Integrated Multi-Criterial Decision Model: A Case Study for the Allocation of Facilities in Chinese Agriculture ’, Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 73 (1): 87–94 .
5.
Ho, W.2008. ‘ Integrated Analytic Hierarchy Process and its Applications—A Literature Review ’, European Journal of Operational Research, 186 (1): 211–28 .
6.
Kirschke, D. and K. Jechlitschka . 2002. Angewandte Mikroökonomie und Wirtschaftspolitik mit Excel (Applied Microeconomics and Economic Policy Using Excel). München: Verlag Franz Vahlen .
7.
Kirschke, D. , E. Daenecke , A. Häger , K. Kästner , K. Jechlitschka and S. Wegener . 2004. ‘ Entscheidungsunterstützung bei der Gestaltung von Agrar-Umweltprogrammen: Ein interaktiver, PC-gestützter Programmierungsansatz für Sachsen-Anhalt’(‘Decision Support for Design of Agri-environmental Measures: Interactive Computer-Based Programming Approach for Saxony-Anhalt’) , Berichte über Landwirtschaft (Reports About Agriculture-Journal on Agricultural Policy and Farming), 82: 494–517 .
8.
Kirschke, D. , A. Häger , K. Jechlitschka and S. Wegener.2007. ‘ Distortions in a Multi-level Co-financing System: The Case of the Agri-environmental Programme of Saxony-Anhalt ’, Agrarwirtschaft, 56 (7): 297–304 .
9.
Kurttila, M. , M.Pesonen , J. Kangas and M. Kajanus . 2000. ‘ Utilizing the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in SWOT Analysis—A Hybrid Method and its Application to A Forestcertification Case ’, Forest Policy and Economics, 1 (1): 41–52 .
10.
Malczewski, J. , R. Moreno-Sanchez , L.A. Bojorquez-Tapia and E. Ongay-Delhumeau . 1997. ‘ Multicriteria Group Decisionmaking Model for Environmental Conflict Analysis in the Cape Region, Mexico ’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 40 (3): 349–74 .
11.
Masozera, M.K. , J.R.R.Alavalapati , S.K. Jacobson and R.K. Shrestha.2006. ‘ Assessing the Suitability of Community-based Management for the Nyungwe Forest Reserve, Rwanda ’, Forest Policy and Economics, 8 (2): 206–16 .
12.
MRiRW (Ministerstwo Rolnictwa i Rozwoju Wsi) (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development). 2004a. Plan Rozwoju Obszaräw Wiejskich na lata 2004–2006 (Plan for Development of Rural Areas for 2004–2006). Warsaw .
13.
Mrirw . 2004. Plan Rozwoju Obszaräw Wiejskich na lata 2004–2006: Załącznik B, E, F, G, H, L, P. (Plan for Development of Rural Areas for 2004–2006. Attachments B, E, F, G, H, L, P)http://www.minrol.gov.pl (accessed on 12 November 2004).
14.
Mrirw . 2007. ‘ Informator Planu Rozwoju Obszaräw Wiejskich na lata 2004–2006' Information on the Plan for Development of Rural Areas for 2004–2006 , PROWinki, 6 (87).
15.
Pohl, B.2001. ‘Decision-making Support for Rural Development Strategies’, in D. Kirschke , M. Odening and H. von Witzke (eds), Berliner Schriften zur Agrar- und Umweltökonomik Bd. (Berliner Journal for Agricultural and Environmental Economics 1).Aachen: Shaker Verlag .
16.
Poister, T.H.1978. Public Program Analysis: Applied Research Methods. Baltimore: University Park Press .
17.
Portney, P.R.2000. ‘The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care’, in R. Stavins (ed.), Economics of the Environment: Selected Readings, pp. 253–67. New York: W.W. Norton & Co .
18.
Prager, K.2006. ‘Communication Processes in Agri-Environmental Policy Development and Decision Making. Berlin’, Ph.D. thesis. Berlin: Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Landwirtschaftlich-Gärtnerische Fakultät.
19.
Rathwell, M. and A. Burns . 1985. ‘ Information Systems Support for Group Planning and Decision-Making Activities ’, MIS Quarterly, 9 (3): 255–71 .
20.
Rohr, T.2004. ‘Einsatz eines mehrkriteriellen Entscheidungsverfahrens im Naturschutzmanagament. Dargestellt am Naturschutzprojekt, Weidelandschaft Eidertal’ (Implementation of multicriteria decision support systems in nature protection management. Presented on the example of nature protection project pasture landscape Eidertal), Ph.D. thesis. Kiel: Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel: Agrarwissenschaftliche Fakultät ( Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel: Faculty of Agriculture ).
Saaty, T. and K. Kearns . 1985. Analytical Planning. The Organisation of Systems. Pittsburgh, RWS Publications .
23.
Saaty, T. and L. Vargas . 1991. Prediction, Projection and Forecasting. Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process in Economics, Finance, Politics, Games and Sports. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers .
24.
Saaty, T. , L. Vargas and K. Dellmann . 2003. ‘ The Allocation of Intangible Resources: The Analytic Hierarchy Process and Linear Programming ’, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 37 (3): 169–84 .
25.
Shrestha, R.K. , J.R.R. Alavalapati and R.S. Kalmbacher . 2004. ‘ Exploring the Potential for Silvopasture Adoption in Southcentral Florida: An Application of SWOT-AHP Method ’, Agricultural Systems, 81 (3): 185–99 .
26.
Steuer, R.E. and P. Na . 2003. ‘ Multiple Criteria Decision Making Combined with Finance: A Categorized Bibliographic Study ’, European Journal of Operational Research, 150 (3): 496–515 .
27.
Vaidya, O.S. and S. Kumar . 2006. ‘ Analytic Hierarchy Process: An Overview of Applications ’, European Journal of Operational Research, 169 (1): 1–29 .
28.
Van De Ven, A. and A. Delbecq . 1974. ‘ The Effectiveness of Nominal, Delphi, and Interacting Group Decision Making Processes ’, The Academy of Management Journal, 17 (4): 605–21 .
Ziolkowska, J.2007a. Agrar-Umweltpolitik in Polen nach dem EU-Beitritt: Bewertungs- und Gestaltungsansätze und Fallstudie für die Wojewodschaft Vorkarpaten (Agri-environmental Policy in Poland after the Accession to the European Union: Evaluation and Design Approaches and Case Study for the Voivodship Subcarpathia). Berliner Schriften zur Agrar- und Umweltökonomik 12 (Berliner Journal for Agricultural and Environmental Economics 12). Aachen: Shaker .
31.
Ziolkowska, J.2007b. ‘Environmental Issues in Polish Agriculture—Development and Perspectives’, in A. Knierim , U.-J. Nagel and C. Schäfer (eds), Managing Economic, Social and Biological Transformations, pp. 73–79. Weikersheim: Margraf Publishers .
32.
Ziolkowska, J. and D. Kirschke . 2007. ‘ Effective and Objective-oriented Budget Allocation for Agri-environmental Programmes in Poland from a Regional Perspective ’, in Academy of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences of Latvia, Latvia University of Agriculture (ed.), Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference ‘Economic Science for Rural Development’ vom 24–25. April 2007, No. 14.
