Agric. Econ. - Czech, 2018, 64(10):445-455 | DOI: 10.17221/281/2017-AGRICECON

A dynamic framework of sustainable development in agriculture and bioenergyOriginal Paper

Chih-Chun KUNG*
Institute of Ecological Economics, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang, China

The use of fossil fuels raises serious environmental concerns and causes major adverse effects such as the ocean level rise and the increased occurrence of hurricanes. To alleviate such problems, a global movement towards the generation of renewable energy is considered to be an effective way to help reducing the global greenhouse gas emissions and to sustain social development. Bioenergy is one attractive renewable energy source in Taiwan because a substantial amount of cropland has been released after the participation in the World Trade Organization (WTO). This study proposes two dynamic agricultural sector models to analyse how changes in the land fertility affect agricultural activities and bioenergy development. The analytical result indicates that economic incentives such as the direct subsidy and tax credit can be used to maintain a desired fertility level. In addition, the objectives of bioenergy development must be defined in advance because changes in discount rates and planning horizons have considerable influences on the effectiveness of policies.

Keywords: agricultural activities, bioenergy, dynamic programming, intergenerational equity

Published: October 31, 2018  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
KUNG C. A dynamic framework of sustainable development in agriculture and bioenergy. Agric. Econ. - Czech. 2018;64(10):445-455. doi: 10.17221/281/2017-AGRICECON.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Adams D.M., Hamilton S.A., McCarl B.A. (1986): The benefits of air pollution control: the case of the Ozone and US agriculture. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 68: 886-894. Go to original source...
    2. Adams D.M., Alig R.J., McCarl B.A., Callaway J.M., Winnett S.M. (1999): Minimum cost strategies for sequestering carbon in forests. Land Economics, 75: 360-374. Go to original source...
    3. Bridgwater T. (2005): Fast pyrolysis based biorefineries. Chemistry, 4: 15-37.
    4. Burton R.O., Martin M.A. (1987): Restrictions on herbicide use: an analysis of economic impacts on US agriculture. North Central Journal of Agricultural Economics, 9: 181-194. Go to original source...
    5. Chang C.C., McCarl B.A., Mjedle J., Richardson J.W. (1992): Sectoral implications of farm program modifications. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 74: 38-49. Go to original source...
    6. Chen C.C., Chang C.C. (2005): The impact of weather on crop yield distribution in Taiwan: some new evidence from panel data models and implications for crop insurance. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 33: 503-511. Go to original source...
    7. Chen C.C., McCarl B.A., Chang C.C., Tso C.T. (2011): Evaluation the potential economic impacts of Taiwanese biomass energy production. Journal of Biomass and Bioenergy, 35: 1693-1701. Go to original source...
    8. Coble K.H., Chang C.C., McCarl B.A., Eddleman B.R. (1992): Assessing economic implications of new technology: the case of cornstarch-based biodegradable plastics. Review of Agricultural Economics, 14: 33-43. Go to original source...
    9. Czernik S., Bridgwater A.V. (2004): Overview of applications of biomass fast pyrolysis oil. Energy Fuels, 18: 590-598. Go to original source...
    10. Djomo N.S., Witters N., Van Dael M., Gabrielle B., Ceulemans R. (2015): Impact of feedstock, land use change, and soil organic carbon on energy and greenhouse gas performance of biomass cogeneration technologies. Applied Energy, 154: 122-130. Go to original source...
    11. Dubois P. (2002): Moral hazard, land fertility and sharecropping in a rural area of the Philippines. Journal of Development Economics, 68: 35-64. Go to original source...
    12. Duloy J.H., Norton R.D. (1973): CHAC, a programming model of Mexican agricultural. In: Goreux L.M., Manne A.S. (eds): Multilevel Planning: Case Studies in Mexico. Vol. 2, Elsevier Science Publishing Co Inc., North-Holland, Amsterdam.
    13. Fargione J., Hill J., Tilman D., Polasky S., Hawthorne P. (2008): Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science, 319: 1235-1238. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    14. Field C.B., Campbell D. (2008): Biomass energy: the scale of the potential resource. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 23: 65-72. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    15. Gaunt J.L., Lehmann J. (2008): Energy balance and emissions associated with biochar sequestration and pyrolysis bioenergy production. Environmental Science Technology, 42: 4152-4158. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    16. Gustavsson L., Haus S., Ortiz C.A., Sathre R., Truong N.L. (2015): Climate effects of bioenergy from forest residues in comparison to fossil energy. Applied Energy, 138: 36-50. Go to original source...
    17. Hamilton S.A., McCarl B.A., Adams R.M. (1985): The effect of aggregate response assumptions on environmental impact analyses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67: 407-413. Go to original source...
    18. Havlin J.L, Beaton J.D; Tisdale S.L., Nelson W.R. (1999): Soil Fertility and Fertilizers: An Introduction to Nutrient Management. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
    19. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007): Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Go to original source...
    20. Kung C.C., McCarl B.A., Chen C.C., Cao X.Y. (2014): Environmental impact and bioenergy production from pyrolysis in Taiwan. Energy & Environment, 25: 13-39. Go to original source...
    21. Kung C.C., Kong F., Choi Y. (2015): Pyrolysis and biochar potential using crop residues and agricultural wastes in China. Ecological Indicators, 51: 139-145. Go to original source...
    22. Lehmann J., Gaunt J., Rondon M. (2006): Biochar sequestration in terrestrial ecosystems - a review. Mitigation Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 11: 403-427. Go to original source...
    23. Martins M.B., Marques C. (2007): Methodological aspects of a mathematical programming model to evaluate soil tillage technologies in a risky environment. European Journal of Operational Research, 177: 556-571. Go to original source...
    24. McCarl B.A., Schneider U.A. (2000): U.S. Agriculture's role in a greenhouse gas emission mitigation world: an economic perspective. Review of Agricultural Economics, 22: 134-59. Go to original source...
    25. McCarl B.A., Schneider U.A. (2003): Economic potential of biomass based fuels for greenhouse gas emission mitigation, Environmental and Resource Economics, 24: 291-312. Go to original source...
    26. McCarl B.A., Spreen T.H. (1980): Price endogenous mathematical programming as a tool for sector analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 62: 87-102. Go to original source...
    27. McCarl B.A., Peacocke C., Chrisman R., Kung C.C., Ronald D. (2009): Economics of biochar production, utilization, and GHG offsets. In: Lehmann J., Joseph S. (eds): Biochar for Environmental Management: Science and Technology. Earthscan Publisher, London: 341-357.
    28. Moran E.F., Brondizio E.S., Tucker J.M., da Silva-Forsbergc M.C., McCrackena S., Fales I. (2000): Effects of soil fertility and land-use on forest succession in Amazônia. Forest Ecology and Management, 139: 93-108. Go to original source...
    29. Olesen J.E., Bindi M. (2002): Consequences of climate change for European agricultural productivity, land use and policy. European Journal of Agronomy, 16: 239-262. Go to original source...
    30. Ridier A., Chaib K., Roussy C. (2016): A dynamic stochastic programming model of crop rotation choice to test the adoption of long rotation under price and production risks. European Journal of Operational Research, 252: 270-279. Go to original source...
    31. Samuelson P.A. (1950): Spatial price equilibrium and linear programming. American Economic Review, 42: 283-303.
    32. Searchinger T., Heimlich R., Houghton R.A., Dong F., Elobeid A., Fabiosa J., Tokgoz S., Hayes D., Yu T. (2008): Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science, 319: 1238-1240. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    33. Steiner C., Teixeira W.G., Lehmann J., Nehls T., de Macêdo J.L.V., Blum W.E.H., Zech W. (2007): Long term effects of manure, charcoal and mineral fertilization on crop production and fertility on a highly weathered Central Amazonian upland soil. Plant and Soil, 291: 275-290. Go to original source...
    34. Takayama T., Judge G.G. (1971): Spatial and Temporal Price Allocation Models. North-Holland, Amsterdam.
    35. Tyner W. (1979): The potential of producing energy from agriculture. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 3: 107-123.
    36. Wang M. (2007): Well-to-wheels: energy and greenhouse gas emission results of fuel ethanol. Argonne National Laboratory, Illinois.
    37. Weber T.A. (2011): Optimal control theory with applications in economics. MIT Press, Cambridge. Go to original source...
    38. Welfle A., Gilbert P., Thornley P. (2014): Securing a bioenergy future without imports. Energy Policy, 68: 1-14. Go to original source...
    39. Yang H.L., Teng J.T., Chern M.S. (2002): A forward recursive algorithm for inventory lot-size models with power demand and shortage. European Journal of Operational Research, 137: 394-400. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content