Paper presented at the 52nd CFCS Annual Meeting, Guadeloupe, July 10-16, 2016 3) In the third step, an economic experiment on farmers’ preferences for composts is made to measure farmers’ willingness to pay for several types of compost. To analyse the impact of compost attributes on farmers’ preferences, information about compost characteristics is gradually given for compost with an experimental auction mechanism. We tested several characteristics of compost likely to influence farmers’ behaviour: (i) visual appearance, (ii) agronomic value, (iii) organic waste used and (iv) origin of the product (local or imported). 4) Then an ex ante analysis of public environmental policies to promote the adoption of compost is conducted with a ‘Choice Experiment’. The aim is to guide public choice towards the definition of adapted public policies while taking into account the interests of farmers. 5) Finally we propose regional scenarios to summarise results of previous steps and to propose spatialized development scenarios of compost adoption in the agriculture sector of Guadeloupe. Main results Our preliminary results indicated that the territory can potentially produce 80 000 tons of compost per year, which would recycle approximately 203 000 tons of organic waste per year. The survey indicated an adoption rate of 18%, which is mainly determined by the nature of cropping system at the farm level. The amended area was highest for banana systems followed by vegetable and tuber crops (Table 1). The amended area of sugarcane was low. The amended area for orchard, melon, pineapple and grasslands represented only 4% of the total amended area. Most of adopters declared that they apply composts as organic amendment, as fertilizer and to substitute chemical fertilizers in order to reduce pollution risks (Fig. 2a). Other motivations were minor in this study; e.g. organic farming, waste recycling. Near 60% of the adopters apply composts manually (Fig. 2b) and use commercial composts (Fig. 2c). Only 22% of farmers declared to produce their composts on farm, which are mainly based on green wastes blended with poultry litter or pig manure. The question about the main constraints involved in compost utilization was asked to both adopters and non-adopters farmers and the results obtained are presented in Fig. 2d. It is interesting to note that farmers showed the same perception of these constraints regardless compost adoption. In this way, the arduousness of the manual application was the main constraint highlighted by farmers, followed by the cost of the practice (product, transport and application) and the lack of available information about compost quality and its effect on the crops and the soil. 0,8
1
(b)
(a)
0,8
0,6 Frequency
Frequency
0,6 0,4 0,2 0 Soil amendement
Fertilizer
Substitution chemical fertilizer
0,4
0,2
0
Other
Manual
0,5
(c)
adopters 0,4
0,6
(d)
non adopters
0,3 Frequency
Frequency
Semi mechanical
Compost application
Motivation to use composts 0,8
Mechanical
0,4
0,2
0,2 0,1 0
0 Commercial
On-farm
Lack of Spreading spreaders
Other
Cost
Lack of Information information
Other
Type of compost Constraints
Figure 2. Results of the survey performed on a network of 520 farmers: (a) motivations to use composts, (b) type of compost application, (c) type of compost used by farmers, and (d) constraints found by farmers to use composts. Although only adopters were questioned for (a), (b) and (c), the question about the constraints in (d) was asked to both adopters and non adopters farmers.
147