Advertisement

Effect of Biofuel on Agricultural Supply and Land Use

  • David ZilbermanEmail author
  • Deepak Rajagopal
  • Scott Kaplan
Chapter
Part of the Natural Resource Management and Policy book series (NRMP, volume 40)

Abstract

While biofuels were introduced, in part, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through replacing fossil fuels, comparing their impact to conventional sources has been difficult. This is largely due to the challenges of quantifying indirect land use change due to biofuels, which has proved controversial. This paper introduces a stylized, dynamic framework to analyze the evolution of land use expansion as well as deforestation over time. Our analysis suggests that land use change is a dynamic process and that relationships between variables are not regular over time and space. Technological change and effective environmental policy, of both agriculture and forests, can curtail deforestation. Outcomes of the model are illustrated with empirical data from the U.S. and Brazil. In the United States, deforestation does not lead directly to cropland expansion, as there is a transition period during which land is used as pasture or left idle. In Brazil, with four times more land in pasture or underutilized land than in cropland, there is significant potential for cropland expansion from this underutilized land.

Keywords

Biofuels Indirect land use change Biofuel impact on agricultural supply 

References

  1. Alston, Julian M., Matthew A. Andersen, Jennifer S. James, and Philip G. Pardey. 2009. Persistence pays: US agricultural productivity growth and the benefits from public R&D spending. Vol. 34. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Arthur, W. Brian. 1996. Increasing Returns and. Harvard business review 74(4):100–109.Google Scholar
  3. Barr, Kanlaya J., Bruce A. Babcock, Miguel A. Carriquiry, Andre M. Nassar, and Leila Harfuch. 2011. Agricultural land elasticities in the United States and Brazil. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy ppr011.Google Scholar
  4. Barrows, Geoffrey, Steven Sexton, and David Zilberman. 2014. Agricultural biotechnology: the promise and prospects of genetically modified crops. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 28 (1): 99–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell, Martin, and Keith Pavitt. 1997. Technological accumulation and industrial growth: contrasts between developed and developing countries. Technology, globalisation and economic performance 83–137.Google Scholar
  6. Binswanger, H., and J. Mcentire. 1987. Behavioural and material determinants of production relations in land abundant tropical Africa. Journal of Economics Development and Cultural changes. 1 (36): 73–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caputo, M. R. 2005. Foundations of dynamic economic analysis: optimal control theory and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Cochrane, Willard W. 1979. The development of American agriculture: A historical analysis. Minnesota: U of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, Avi J., and Geoffrey C. Harcourt. 2003. Retrospectives: Whatever happened to the Cambridge capital theory controversies? Journal of Economic Perspectives 17(1):199–214.Google Scholar
  10. Dixit, Avinash K., and Robert S. Pindyck. 1995. The options approach to capital investment. Real options and investment under uncertainty: Classical readings and recent contributions 61–78.Google Scholar
  11. Farrell, Alexander E., Richard J. Plevin, Brian T. Turner, Andrew D. Jones, Michael O’hare, and Daniel M. Kammen. 2006. Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science 311(5760): 506–508.Google Scholar
  12. Freire de Sousa, I. S., and Lawrence Busch. 1998. Networks and agricultural development: The case of soybean production and consumption in Brazil. Rural Sociology 63(3): 349–371.Google Scholar
  13. Galbraith, John K., and John D. Black. 1938. The maintenance of agricultural production during depression: the explanations reviewed. The Journal of political economy 305–323.Google Scholar
  14. Geist, Helmut J., and Eric F. Lambin. 2002. Proximate causes and underlying driving forces of tropical deforestation tropical forests are disappearing as the result of many pressures, both local and regional, acting in various combinations in different geographical locations. BioScience 52 (2): 143–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goldewijk, Kees Klein, and Navin Ramankutty. 2004. Land use changes during the past 300 years. Land use, land cover and soil sciences. In Encyclopedia of life support systems 1, ed. Verheye WH.Google Scholar
  16. Goldsmith, Peter, and Rodolfo Hirsch. 2006. The Brazilian soybean complex. Choices 21 (2): 97–104.Google Scholar
  17. Hochman, E., and D. Zilberman. 1986. Optimal strategies of development processes of frontier environments. Science of the Total Environment 55: 111–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hochman, Gal, Deepak Rajagopal, Govinda Timilsina, and David Zilberman. 2014. Quantifying the causes of the global food commodity price crisis. Biomass and Bioenergy 68: 106–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Houthakker, Hendrik S. 1955. The Pareto distribution and the Cobb-Douglas production function in activity analysis. The Review of Economic Studies 27–31.Google Scholar
  20. IBGE. 2011. Produção Agrícola Municipal. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística.Google Scholar
  21. Khanna, Madhu, and David Zilberman. 2012. Modeling the land-use and greenhouse-gas implications of biofuels. Climate Change Economics 3(03).Google Scholar
  22. Lal, Rattan. 2002. Soil carbon dynamics in cropland and rangeland. Environmental Pollution 116 (3): 353–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lambin, Eric F., and Patrick Meyfroidt. 2011. Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108 (9): 3465–3472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lichtenberg, Erik, and David Zilberman. 1988. Efficient regulation of environmental health risks. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 167–178.Google Scholar
  25. Moran, Emilio F. 1981. Developing the Amazon. Indiana Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  26. Mundlak, Yair. 2001. Production and supply. Handbook of agricultural economics 1: 3–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nichols, T.E. 1969. Transportation and regional development in agriculture. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 51 (5): 1455–1463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Olmstead, Alan L., and Paul Webb Rhode. 2008. Creating abundance: Biological innovation and American agricultural development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Rausser, Gordon C., Johan Swinnen, and Pinhas Zusman. 2011. Political power and economic policy: Theory, analysis, and empirical applications. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Schultz, Theodore William. 1964. Transforming traditional agriculture. Transforming traditional agriculture.Google Scholar
  31. Searchinger, Timothy, Ralph Heimlich, Richard A. Houghton, Fengxia Dong, Amani Elobeid, Jacinto Fabiosa, Simla Tokgoz, Dermot Hayes, and Yu. Tun-Hsiang. 2008. Use of US croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science 319 (5867): 1238–1240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Southgate, Douglas. 1990. The causes of land degradation along “spontaneously” expanding agricultural frontiers in the Third World. Land Economics 93–101.Google Scholar
  33. Swinton, Scott M., Bruce A. Babcock, Laura K. James, and Varaprasad Bandaru. 2011. Higher US crop prices trigger little area expansion so marginal land for biofuel crops is limited. Energy Policy 39 (9): 5254–5258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Warnknen, Philip. 1999. The Development and Growth of Brazil’s Soybean Industry. Wiley Publishers.Google Scholar
  35. World Development Report. 1986. World Bank Publications: Business and Economics. p. 77.Google Scholar
  36. Wright, Brian D. 2011. The economics of grain price volatility. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 33 (1): 32–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wright, Brian. 2014. Global biofuels: key to the puzzle of grain market behavior. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 28 (1): 73–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Xabadia, Angels, Renan U. Goetz, and David Zilberman. 2006. Control of accumulating stock pollution by heterogeneous producers. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 30 (7): 1105–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zilberman, David. 2014. The economics of sustainable development. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 96 (2): 385–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Zilberman
    • 1
    Email author
  • Deepak Rajagopal
    • 2
  • Scott Kaplan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Agricultural and Resource EconomicsUniversity of California at BerkeleyBerkeleyUSA
  2. 2.Institute of the Environment and SustainabilityUniversity of California at Los AngelesLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations