Abstract
The decision on who will pay for environmental damage to Brazilian agriculture and how this will be done looks like a zero-sum game between environmentalists and farmers. Their different interests, however, do not prevent the development of strategies that maximize social welfare. This work shows that it is possible to produce more with fewer resources and less environmental impact. Following Färe et al. (Rev Econ Stat 71:90–98, 1989) and Picazo-Tadeo et al. (Eur J Oper Res 220:798–809, 2012), we use data envelopment analysis (DEA) and directional distance functions (DDF) to evaluate the impact of environmental regulations on the drop in the productivity and eco-efficiency of Brazilian agriculture. The methodology is applied to the data from 33 decision-making units (DMUs): 27 States of the Federation of Brazil as a whole, and the five geographical regions taken in their entirety—relating to three inputs and three outputs, one of which is desirable and the other two undesirable. The results show that when DMUs face environmental rules preventing free disposal of undesirable output, their potential to increase desirable output is affected. Also an estimate was made of a set of eco-efficiency indicators that, satisfying the Pareto optimality concept, can support the formulation of strategies consistent with the simultaneous optimization of economic and environmental goals. Comparing the results with the commitments made by Brazil to reduce emissions in agriculture by 2020, it is concluded that the country can surpass the goal with technology given only improving the emissions, however, maintaining the level of resource consumption, production, and degraded lands. On the other hand, while trying to maximize production while minimizing land degradation and CO2 emissions, a maximum of two years is needed to attain this goal. Additional measures may be used, such as adopting international best practices and developing clean technology innovation. Accordingly, it is recommended that a high priority be given to strategies aimed at improving eco-efficiency and eliminating institutional barriers to transferring and spreading knowledge of best national and international technologies. These strategies can generate greater results in productivity and environmental conservation than other actions aimed at fostering technological innovation. While the cost of imitation of existing clean technology is lower than the cost of innovation, eco-inefficient units can approach the leaders, thus creating the conditions to sustain the convergence of economic and environmental development.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This ratio shall increase to 30 % by 2030, according to McKinsey (2009).
- 2.
If it adopted national best practices, agriculture would achieve only 74 % of what was predicted (3.67/4.9).
- 3.
That is less relevant in this study, since our sample was the whole population.
References
Azad MAS, Ancev T (2010) Using ecological indices to measure economic and environmental performance of irrigated agriculture. Ecol Econ 69(8):1731–1739
Brasil (2006) Primeiro Inventário Brasileiro de Emissões Antrópicas de Gases de Efeito Estufa – Relatórios de Referência. Brasília: MCT – Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia
Brasil (2010) Segundo Inventário Brasileiro de Emissões de Gases de Efeito Estufa. MCT – Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia, Brasília
Brasil (2010a) Segundo Inventário Brasileiro de Emissões Antrópicas de Gases de Efeito Estufa – Relatórios de Referência: Emissões de óxido de nitroso de solos agrícolas e manejo de dejetos. Brasília: MCT – Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia
Brasil (2010b) Segundo Inventário Brasileiro de Emissões Antrópicas de Gases de Efeito Estufa – Relatórios de Referência: Emissões de GEE na queima de resíduos agrícolas. Brasília: MCT – Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia
Brasil (2010c) Segundo Inventário Brasileiro de Emissões Antrópicas de Gases de Efeito Estufa – Relatórios de Referência: Emissões de metano do cultivo de arroz. Brasília: MCT – Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia
Brasil (2010d) Segundo Inventário Brasileiro de Emissões Antrópicas de Gases de Efeito Estufa – Relatórios de Referência: Emissões de metano por fermentação entérica e manejo de dejetos de animais. Brasília: MCT – Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia
Brümmer B, Glauben T, Thijssen G (2002) Decomposition of productivity growth using distance functions: the case of dairy farms in three European countries. Am J Agric Econ 84(3):628–644. http://ajae.oxfordjournals.org/content/84/3/
Chung YH, Färe R, Grosskopf S (1997) Productivity and undesirable outputs: a directional distance function approach. J Environ Manage 51(3):229–240
Coelli TJ, Rao DSP, O’Donnell CJ, Battese GE (2005) An Introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis, 2nd edn. Springer, New York. http://www.springer.com/economics/econometrics/book/978-0-387-24265-1
Elkington J (1999) Cannibals with forks: triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone Publishing Ltd, Oxford, ISBN 9781841120843
Färe R, Grosskopf S (2000) Theory and application of directional distance functions. J Prod Anal 13(2):93–103
Färe R, Grosskopf S (2005) New directions: efficiency and productivity. Springer, Berlin, p 183
Färe R, Grosskopf S, Pasurka C (1986) Effects on relative efficiency in electric power generation due to environmental controls. Resour Energy 8(2):167–184
Färe R, Grosskopf S, Lovell CAK, Pasurka C (1989) Multilateral productivity comparisons when some outputs are undesirable: a nonparametric approach. Rev Econ Stat 71(1):90–98
Färe R, Grosskopf S, Weber WL (2006) Shadow prices and pollution costs in U.S. agriculture. Ecol Econ 56(1):89–103
Farrell MJ (1957) The measurement of productive efficiency. J Royal Stat Soc Series A (General) 120(3):253–290
Fernandez C, Koop G, Steel M FJ (2002) Multiple-output production with undesirable outputs: an application to nitrogen surplus in agriculture. J Am Stat Assoc 97:432–442. http://ideas.repec.org/a/bes/jnlasa/v97y2002mjunep432-442.html
Freeman AM, III, Haveman RH, Kneese AV (1973) Economics of environmental policy. Wiley, New York
Gomes EG (2008) Uso de modelos DEA em agricultura: revisão da literatura. ENGEVISTA 10(1):27–51
Grosskopf S (1986) The role of the reference technology in measuring productive efficiency. Econ J 96(382):499–513
IBGE (2010) Censo Agropecuário 2006. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, Rio de Janeiro
IBGE (2011) Sistema de Contas Nacionais - Brasil 2005–2009. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, Rio de Janeiro
Kjærsgaard J, Vestergaard N, Kerstens K (2009) Ecological benchmarking to explore alternative fishing schemes to protect endangered species by substitution: the Danish demersal fishery in the North Sea. Environ Resour Econ 43(4):573–590
Lampe HW, Hilgers D (2015) Trajectories of efficiency measurement: a bibliometric analysis of DEA and SFA. Eu J Oper Res 240(1):1–21, ISSN 0377-2217. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037722171400383X
Luenberger DG (1992) New optimality principles for economic efficiency and equilibrium. J Optim Theory Appl 75(2):221–264
Malmquist S (1953) Index numbers and indifference curves. Trabajos de Estatistica 4(1):209–242
McKinsey (2009) Caminhos para uma economia de baixa emissão de carbono no Brasil. McKinsey & Company, São Paulo
Mendes JTG, Padilha Jr J (2007) Agronegócio: uma abordagem econômica: Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey, p 369
Mickwitz P, Melanen M, Rosenström U, Seppälä J (2006) Regional eco-efficiency indicators—a participatory approach. J Clean Prod 14(18):1603–1611
O’Donnell CJ (2010) Measuring and decomposing agricultural productivity and profitability change*: agricultural productivity and profitability change. Aust J Agric Resour Econ 54(4):527–560. http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:223605
OECD (1998) Eco-efficiency. Co-operation O-OfE, Development, editors. OECD Publishing, Paris, p 84
OECD (2010) OECD-FAO Agricultural outlook 2010–2019. OECD Publishing, Paris, p 252
Picazo-Tadeo AJ, Prior D (2009) Environmental externalities and efficiency measurement. J Environ Manage 90(11):3332–3339
Picazo-Tadeo AJ, Reig-Martínez E, Hernández-Sancho F (2005) Directional distance functions and environmental regulation. Resour Energy Econ 27(2):131–142
Picazo-Tadeo AJ, Beltrán-Esteve M, Gómez-Limón JA (2012) Assessing eco-efficiency with directional distance functions. Eur J Oper Res 220(3):798–809
Pittman RW (1983) Multilateral productivity comparisons with undesirable outputs. Econ J 93(372):883–891
Porter ME, Van Der Linde C (1995) Green and competitive: ending the stalemate. Harvard Bus Rev 73(5):120–134
Sarkis J, Weinrach J (2001) Using data envelopment analysis to evaluate environmentally conscious waste treatment technology. J Clean Prod 9(5):417–27. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652600000846
Schaltegger S (1996) Corporate environmental accounting, 1st edn. Wiley, New York. p 324
Scheel H (2001) Undesirable outputs in efficiency valuations. Eur J Oper Res 132(2):400–410
Shephard RW(1953) Cost and production functions. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton
Tyteca D (1996) On the measurement of the environmental performance of firms—a literature review and a productive efficiency perspective. J Environ Manage 46(3):281–308
Verfaillie HA, Bidwell R (2000) Measuring eco-efficiency: a guide to reporting company performance. World Business Council for Sustainable Development—WBCSD, Geneva
Zhang B, Bi J, Fan Z, Yuan Z, Ge J (2008) Eco-efficiency analysis of industrial system in China: a data envelopment analysis approach. Ecol Econ 68(1–2):306–316
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rosano-Peña, C., Daher, C.E. (2015). The Impact of Environmental Regulation and Some Strategies for Improving the Eco-Efficiency of Brazilian Agriculture. In: Guarnieri, P. (eds) Decision Models in Engineering and Management. Decision Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11949-6_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11949-6_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-11948-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-11949-6
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)