Counterfactual evaluation of two Austrian agri‐environmental schemes in 2014–2018

Abstract This article investigates the causal effect of farm participation in two Austrian agri‐environmental schemes (AES), Immergrün ( ground cover ) and Zwischenfrucht ( catch cropping ), on fertilizer and plant protection expenditures in the 2014 programming period. Combining European Farm Accou...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Agricultural Economics
Main Authors: Uehleke, Reinhard, Leonhardt, Heidi, Hüttel, Silke
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: 2023
Subjects:
DML
Online Access:https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/139177
https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12805
id ftsubgoettingen:oai:publications.goettingen-research-online.de:2/139177
record_format openpolar
spelling ftsubgoettingen:oai:publications.goettingen-research-online.de:2/139177 2024-01-07T09:42:55+01:00 Counterfactual evaluation of two Austrian agri‐environmental schemes in 2014–2018 Uehleke, Reinhard Leonhardt, Heidi Hüttel, Silke Uehleke, Reinhard Leonhardt, Heidi Hüttel, Silke 2023 https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/139177 https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12805 en eng https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/139177 doi:10.1111/agec.12805 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ info:eu-repo/semantics/article journal_article yes 2023 ftsubgoettingen https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12805 2023-12-10T23:12:09Z Abstract This article investigates the causal effect of farm participation in two Austrian agri‐environmental schemes (AES), Immergrün ( ground cover ) and Zwischenfrucht ( catch cropping ), on fertilizer and plant protection expenditures in the 2014 programming period. Combining European Farm Accountancy Data Network data with information on scheme participation from administrative control data offers identifying farm participation in specific schemes targeted at reducing input intensity. Given the overall small sample, we maximized the utilizable sample size by combining difference‐in‐difference and kernel matching with automated bandwidth selection. To address the remaining post‐matching covariate imbalances, we used double machine learning (DML) techniques for a guided selection of potential confounding covariates. Our results suggest that, given the available sample, we cannot substantiate moderate effects of AES participation, and that guided covariate selection by DML offers no gain over non‐guided covariate selection for the small sample. Our results underline the need to increase the number of farms and the duration in available farm panels to substantiate future counterfactual‐based evaluations of policy. Article in Journal/Newspaper DML GRO.publications (Göttingen Research Online Publications - Göttingen University) Agricultural Economics
institution Open Polar
collection GRO.publications (Göttingen Research Online Publications - Göttingen University)
op_collection_id ftsubgoettingen
language English
description Abstract This article investigates the causal effect of farm participation in two Austrian agri‐environmental schemes (AES), Immergrün ( ground cover ) and Zwischenfrucht ( catch cropping ), on fertilizer and plant protection expenditures in the 2014 programming period. Combining European Farm Accountancy Data Network data with information on scheme participation from administrative control data offers identifying farm participation in specific schemes targeted at reducing input intensity. Given the overall small sample, we maximized the utilizable sample size by combining difference‐in‐difference and kernel matching with automated bandwidth selection. To address the remaining post‐matching covariate imbalances, we used double machine learning (DML) techniques for a guided selection of potential confounding covariates. Our results suggest that, given the available sample, we cannot substantiate moderate effects of AES participation, and that guided covariate selection by DML offers no gain over non‐guided covariate selection for the small sample. Our results underline the need to increase the number of farms and the duration in available farm panels to substantiate future counterfactual‐based evaluations of policy.
author2 Uehleke, Reinhard
Leonhardt, Heidi
Hüttel, Silke
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Uehleke, Reinhard
Leonhardt, Heidi
Hüttel, Silke
spellingShingle Uehleke, Reinhard
Leonhardt, Heidi
Hüttel, Silke
Counterfactual evaluation of two Austrian agri‐environmental schemes in 2014–2018
author_facet Uehleke, Reinhard
Leonhardt, Heidi
Hüttel, Silke
author_sort Uehleke, Reinhard
title Counterfactual evaluation of two Austrian agri‐environmental schemes in 2014–2018
title_short Counterfactual evaluation of two Austrian agri‐environmental schemes in 2014–2018
title_full Counterfactual evaluation of two Austrian agri‐environmental schemes in 2014–2018
title_fullStr Counterfactual evaluation of two Austrian agri‐environmental schemes in 2014–2018
title_full_unstemmed Counterfactual evaluation of two Austrian agri‐environmental schemes in 2014–2018
title_sort counterfactual evaluation of two austrian agri‐environmental schemes in 2014–2018
publishDate 2023
url https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/139177
https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12805
genre DML
genre_facet DML
op_relation https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/139177
doi:10.1111/agec.12805
op_rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12805
container_title Agricultural Economics
_version_ 1787424167328481280