Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: http://hdl.handle.net/10532/4607
Registro completo de metadatos
Campo DC Valor Idioma
dc.contributor.authorMartínez Martínez, Yolandaes_ES
dc.contributor.authorCirujeda Ranzenberger, Aliciaes_ES
dc.contributor.authorGómez, Miguel I.es_ES
dc.contributor.authorMarí León, Ana Isabeles_ES
dc.contributor.authorPardo Sanclemente, Gabrieles_ES
dc.coverage.spatialSanidad Vegetales_ES
dc.date.accessioned2019-04-03T12:22:51Z-
dc.date.available2019-04-03T12:22:51Z-
dc.date.issued2018es_ES
dc.identifier.citationVIII Conference Spanish-Portuguese Association of Natural and Environmental Resource Economics (AERNA). Madrid, 3 – 5 de septiembre de 2018-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10532/4607-
dc.description.abstractTeosinte is an invasive weed which emerged recently in Northeastern Spain, an important corn-growing region in Western Europe. It is causing substantial agronomic and economic damages and is threatening the availability of corn in the region. Farmers and regulatory agencies can choose from a number of strategies to control for teosinte infestations including adoption of specific cultural practices such as manual control constructing false seedbeds, as well as adopting corn rotations with other annual and perennial crops. In spite of the potential negative impacts of this weed, little is known about what the optimal control strategies are, both from the private (e.g. the farm) and social (e.g. regulatory agencies) perspectives. In response, we develop a dynamic optimization model to identify the sequence of control strategies that minimize private and social costs under low- and high-infestation level scenarios, for a fifteen-year planning horizon. We calibrate the model using biological data from experimental trials and economic parameters collected from farmers in the region. Our results suggest the economic losses of teosinte infestation can reach up to 7444 and 8421 €/ha for low- and high-infestation scenarios if nothing is done to control it. In addition, results show that optimal private and social strategies are different. For example, under high-infestation levels, private losses are minimized at 26.5% by not controlling in years 1-2, use false seedbeds in year 3, planting alfalfa in years 4-8, and planting corn thereafter in the total area. In contrast, social cost are minimized at 27.9% by adopting rotations starting year, return to corn mono-cropping in half the area after year four. Results show false seedbed and manual controls, currently recommended by the regulatory agency in lowinfestation cases, are not socially optimal.en
dc.language.isoenes_ES
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/*
dc.titleBioeconomic model for optimal control of the invasive weed Zea mays subspp. (teosinte) in Spainen
dc.typeConference Material*
dc.bibliographicCitation.conferencedate3 – 5 de septiembre de 2018es_ES
dc.bibliographicCitation.conferencenameVIII Conference Spanish-Portuguese Association of Natural and Environmental Resource Economics (AERNA)en
dc.bibliographicCitation.conferenceplaceMadrides_ES
dc.subject.agrovocTeosintees
dc.subject.agrovocZea mayses
dc.subject.agrovocControl de malezases
dc.subject.agrovocMétodos de controles
dc.type.refereedRefereedes_ES
dc.type.specifiedPaperes_ES
Aparece en las colecciones: [DOCIART] Artículos científicos, técnicos y divulgativos

Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato  
2018_467.pdf256,83 kBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir


Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons

La información de este repositorio es indexada en: