Subproject (TP) 5
Project takers: Applicant:
Prof. Dr. rer. pol. Klaus Müller,
Humboldt
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and ZALF
Assistant: Dipl. engineer agr. Isabella
Karpinski
(Ph.D. Student),
ZALF
TP title: Economical meaning of a
planar introduction of Precision Farming in
Germany
TP shortened title: Economical
analysis
TP goals:
The scientific work in TP5 aims at producing qualitative and quantitative statements for the economical meaning of Precision Farming (PF) in Germany, where the evaluation of avoided negative and produced positive externalities plays a significant role. The estimation of the impacts of PF on the competitiveness of German agriculture and the estimation of sectoral effects on agriculture and agrarian technology producers are equally important.
These statements for the economical meaning of PF are first quantified and supported empirically by a cost-benefit-analysis. This is followed by an analysis of the possibilities of the different uses of PF in agro-environmental programs (AEP), with the quantification of cost reduction potential for existing programs and their possible reorientation.
Position of TP5 in the group/network:
The subproject 5 "economic analysis" is part of the research
group in project field 1 "integration level of the value chain".
There is therefore, close co-operation between TP5 and other TPs from the same
project level and the two cross section projects. Intense co-operation with TP3
"economic efficiency of PF" and TP4 " relevance of PF in nature
protection in the context of landscape is particularly important for the quantification of direct and
effect-referred indirect costs and benefits, in the context of
cost-benefit-analysis.
The identification and evaluation of the
economical effects of the PF technology is crucial in answering the question of
whether or not to promote and introduce this technology with governmental
support. Beyond the view of the single farm-level , the sectoral effects on
international competitiveness and structural change, are of certain interest
from an economic viewpoint, with great emphasis on occupational effects. The
analyses refer in detail to the identification and evaluation of the positive
and avoided negative externalities of Precision Farming after a nation-wide
introduction in Germany and to the effects on the German international
agricultural competitiveness, as well as, that of resident agrarian technology
producers.
Due to the
enormous importance of governmental subsidies in the agrarian sector, the main
question in the economic analysis is, whether this technology is suitable, in
ensuring a more efficient employment of national resources for the
administration and monitoring of national standards and advancement programs in
agriculture. This is especially important for the proper utilization of the
modulation means (e.g. for agrarian environmental programs, AEP) and the
monitoring of cross-compliance regulations. Therefore, two fundamental ways
were examined. It is assumed that the new technology can be used to administer
and control existing programs more efficiently, as Precision Farming offers in
principle, the chance to rearrange agrarian environmental programs and
therefore, to identify additional gains in efficiency in the utilization of public
funds.
The question whether Precision Farming is ecologically meaningful and above all, whether it is economically justifiable, could not be answered clearly, both in literature and by the preceeding research project to “preagro II”. However, the economical analysis represents a crucial contribution in clarifying the fundamental legitimacy of the nation-wide introduction of PF in Germany, especially in the consideration of the sustainability concept and the weighing of the value chain ,with the focus on the practical application of Precision Farming.
The speed of the nation-wide introduction of a new technology such as Precision Farming depends significantly on the incentives set by the state or the economy. Governmental support might be justified, if the technology introduction suggests positive allocative or distributive effects, results which otherwise could not be realized. So far, the national support is based primarily on empirically not examined expectations or rather hypotheses, that are to be tested for their qualitative and quantitative correctness by means of investigations through the subproject 5.
Time
schedule: Status Quo and work concept
|
Time
steps (1/4 a) Activities
|
I 2005 |
II 2005 |
III 2005 |
IV 2005 |
I 2006 |
II 2006 |
III 2006 |
IV 2006 |
Bibliographical evaluation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identification for the
relevant costs and Benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quantification of direct
costs und benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quantification of indirect
costs und benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identification of
reduction of costpotentials in AEP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Extrapolation of th direct
and indirect costs and benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of
„Intangibles“ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Execution of the
cost-benefit-analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development of
organization options for AEP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preparation of the results and final report |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Last
update: 14.04.2005,
Isabella Karpinski