Money for Wine?: Complementarities in the Provision of Private and Public Goods to Wine Producers

Abstract

work is licensed under a Creative Commons IGO 3.0 AttributionNonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC-IGO BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/igo/ legalcode) and may be reproduced with attribution to the IDB and for any non-commercial purpose, as provided below. No derivative work is allowed.Any dispute related to the use of the works of the IDB that cannot be settled amicably shall be submitted to arbitration pursuant to the UNCITRAL rules. The use of the IDB's name for any purpose other than for attribution, and the use of IDB's logo shall be subject to a separate written license agreement between the IDB and the user and is not authorized as part of this CC-IGO license.Following a peer review process, and with previous written consent by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), a revised version of this work may also be reproduced in any academic journal, including those indexed by the American Economic Association's EconLit, provided that the IDB is credited and that the author(s) receive no income from the publication. Therefore, the restriction to receive income from such publication shall only extend to the publication's author(s). With regard to such restriction, in case of any inconsistency between the Creative Commons IGO 3.0 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license and these statements, the latter shall prevail.Note that link provided above includes additional terms and conditions of the license. Abstract This paper evaluates the impact of two programs that provide public and private goods, in the form of irrigation canals and materials (such as hail nets). Using a twelve-year panel of wine producers from Mendoza and San Juan, Argentina, we find that the programs have had positive and significant impacts on production and yield. We also find that the programs present important complementarities, in the sense that being exposed to the two interventions increases the outputs more than the mere sum of the separate interventions.

Technical and Environmental Efficiency of Grapevine Production in Mendoza, Argentina

“…This led to international support to promote technical advice by agricultural extensionists and technology adoption programs. While some interventions were successful by improving output growth and managerial performance (Maffioli et al 2011;Gibbons et al 2016), other cases did not succeed as expected (World Bank 2017;Cerdán-Infantes 2008). Potential waves of strategic planning require empirical applications that address the underlying heterogeneity in production decisions of vineyards.…”

“…In 2016, national government spent USD 11.2 million to improve the market price through reductions in wine stock. Considering external factors in grapevine production, institutions have deployed programs for assessing potential climate risks and minimizing effects of contingencies: for example, through programs like hail storm protection and rural insurance (Gibbons et al 2016). Institutions seek to help farmers to improve their agronomic management and practices through smarter use of agrochemicals.…”

“…The perception that small producers are missing out on technology and quality improvements is an intense discussion. Gibbons et al (2016) and Maffioli et al (2011) analyzed the effect of public policies on the adoption of technologies and agricultural extension services in Western Argentina. The effect of subsidies on productivity continues to divide researchers in literature (Foster et al 2005;Hartt Kentnor 2012;Gibbons et al 2016;Badiani et al 2011;OECD 2003;Pfeiffer and Lin 2014;Guesmi et al 2012).…”

“…There is evidence that vineyard association and viticulturist cluster groups have interest in the environmental performance of farmers. Further persuasion of their members to adapt and improve their practices inline with environmental efficiency could effectively widespread to a broader spectrum (Gibbons et al 2016;Maffioli et al 2011).…”