DOCSLIB.ORG

The Economic Impacts of Agriculture and Forest Industries in Virginia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Economic Impacts of Agriculture and Forest Industries in Virginia The Economic Impacts of Agriculture and Forest Industries in Virginia Terance J. Rephann, Ph.D. June 2013 The Economic Impacts of Agriculture and Forest Industries in Virginia Terance J. Rephann, Ph.D. Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service University of Virginia June 2013 i Copyright © 2013 by the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia Credits: Cover photos clockwise from upper left; forest by Lightfoot of MorgueFile.com, livestock by Jusben of MorgueFile.com, meat display by Seamann of MorgueFile.com, wood stack from Imageafter.com P.O. Box 400206 Charlottesville, VA 22904 (434) 982-5522 • FAX: (434) 982-5524 • TDD: (434) 982-HEAR Website: www.coopercenter.org/ Richmond - Virginia Institute of Government 11 South 12th Street, Suite 225 Richmond, VA 23219-4035 (804) 371-0202 • FAX: (804) 371-0234 • TDD: (804) 982-HEAR Richmond - Council on Virginia’s Future 1001 E. Broad Street, Suite 430 Richmond, VA 23219 (804) 371-2346 • FAX: (804) 371-2347 Southwest One College Avenue Wise, VA 24293 (276) 328-0133 • FAX: (276) 328-0233 • TDD (540) 328-0191 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ......................................................................................................................................................iv List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................................... v Preface .............................................................................................................................................................vii Study Highlights ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 7 Section 1 Virginia’s Agriculture and Forestry Industries .................................................................................... 9 Agriculture................................................................................................................................................. 9 Forestry .................................................................................................................................................... 17 Section 2 Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 25 Agriculture and Forestry-related Industry Identification......................................................................... 25 Economic Impact Modeling .................................................................................................................... 26 Data .......................................................................................................................................................... 28 Section 3 Results .............................................................................................................................................. 31 Statewide Impacts.................................................................................................................................... 31 Locality Impacts ...................................................................................................................................... 34 International Export Impacts ................................................................................................................... 36 Section 4 Other Agriculture and Forestry Impacts and Benefits ...................................................................... 39 Farm-related Income ............................................................................................................................... 39 Agriculture and Forest Related Tourism and Recreation ..................................................................... 39 Other Economic Impacts ..................................................................................................................... 40 Environment and Quality of Life ......................................................................................................... 41 Section 5 Summary and Conclusions .............................................................................................................. 43 References ..................................................................................................................................................... 45 Appendices ..................................................................................................................................................... 51 iii LIST OF TABLES 1.1 Number of Wood-using Mills by Type, Virginia, 1992-2009.................................................................... 19 1.2 Virginia Biomass Power Plants, Existing and Proposed ........................................................................... 24 3.1 Virginia Agriculture and Forestry-related Industries Direct Output, Employment, and Value-added, 2011 .......................................................................................................................... 31 3.2 Virginia Total, Direct, Indirect, and Induced Impacts of Agriculture and Forestry-related Industries, 2011 ........................................................................................................... 32 3.3 Total Impact of Virginia’s Agriculture and Forestry-related Industries by Major Industry, 2011 ............. 32 3.4 Total Impact of Virginia’s Agriculture and Forestry-related Industries by Component, Output in Millions of Dollars, 2011 ...................................................................................................... 33 3.5 Total Impact of Virginia’s Agriculture and Forestry-related Industries, Employment, 2011 ................... 33 3.6 Total Impact of Virginia’s Agriculture and Forestry-related Industries, Value-added in Millions of Dollars, 2011 ............................................................................................. 33 3.7 Virginia Total, Direct, Indirect, and Induced Impacts of Agriculture and Forestry-Related Industry Exports, 2011 .......................................................................................................................... 36 3.8 Virginia Total, Direct, Indirect, and Induced Impacts of Agriculture and Forestry-Related Industry Exports by Component, 2011 .................................................................................................. 37 4.1 Top Rural, Agriculture and Forest Activities and Attractions for Virginia Leisure Visitors, 2011 .......... 39 4.2 Wildlife Recreation Economic Impacts in Virginia, 2006......................................................................... 40 4.3 Ecological Values of Virginia Farm and Forestland .................................................................................. 41 B.1 Virginia Agriculture and Forestry-related Industries by Component ........................................................ 57 C.1 Virginia Agricultural Cash Receipts by IMPLAN Sector, 1990-2011 ..................................................... 59 D.1 Direct and Total Economic Impacts of Virginia Agriculture and Forestry-related Industries by Locality, Output 2011 ...................................................................................................... 61 D.2 Direct and Total Economic Impacts of Virginia Agriculture and Forestry-related Industries by Locality, Employment 2011 ............................................................................................. 65 D.3 Direct and Total Economic Impacts of Virginia Agriculture and Forestry-related Industries by Locality, Value-added 2011 ............................................................................................. 69 iv LIST OF FIGURES 1.1 Cash Receipts by Commodity, Virginia, 2011............................................................................................... 9 1.2 Virginia Agricultural Cash Receipts, 1990-2011 ........................................................................................... 9 1.3 Virginia Farm Employment and Land Area, 1990-2010 ............................................................................. 10 1.4 Change in Virginia Farm Commodity Sales by Size and State Specialization, 2006-2011 ........................ 10 1.5 Government Payments as a Percentage of Virginia Farm Gross Cash Income, 1990-2011........................ 11 1.6 Farm Employment as Percentage of Total Employment by Locality, 2010 ................................................ 12 1.7 Virginia Agricultural Exports, 2006-2011 ................................................................................................... 12 1.8 Direct Sales of Agricultural Products, Virginia, 1997-2007 ........................................................................ 13 1.9 Employment Creation Agriculture-related Manufacturing Industries in Virginia ...................................... 13 1.10 Virginia Agriculture-related Manufacturing Employment, 2000-2011 ....................................................... 14 1.11 Virginia Tobacco Farm Cash Receipts and Tobacco Manufacturing Employment, 1990-2011 ................. 15 1.12
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Economic Sustainability of Small-Scale Forestry
    Economic Sustainability of Small-Scale Forestry International IUFRO Symposium Anssi Niskanen and Johanna Väyrynen (eds.) EFI Proceedings No. 36, 2001 European Forest Institute IUFRO Working Unit 3.08.00 Academy of Finland Finnair Metsämiesten Säätiö –Foundation MTK – The Central Union of Agricultural Producers and Forest Owners, Finland University of Joensuu, Faculty of Forestry, Finland EFI Proceedings No. 36, 2001 Economic Sustainability of Small-Scale Forestry Anssi Niskanen and Johanna Väyrynen (eds.) Publisher: European Forest Institute Series Editors: Risto Päivinen, Editor-in-Chief Tim Green, Technical Editor Brita Pajari, Conference Manager Editorial Office: European Forest Institute Phone: +358 13 252 020 Torikatu 34 Fax. +358 13 124 393 FIN-80100 Joensuu, Finland Email: [email protected] WWW: http://www.efi.fi/ Cover photo: Markku Tano Layout: Johanna Väyrynen Printing: Gummerus Printing Saarijärvi, Finland 2001 Disclaimer: The papers in this book comprise the proceedings of the event mentioned on the cover and title page. They reflect the authors' opinions and do not necessarily correspond to those of the European Forest Institute. The papers published in this volume have been peer-reviewed. © European Forest Institute 2001 ISSN 1237-8801 ISBN 952-9844-82-4 Contents Foreword ........................................................................................................... 5 Special Session: Economic Sustainabiliy of Small-Scale Forestry – Perspectives around the World – John Herbohn Prospects for Small-Scale Forestry
    [Show full text]
  • Land Degradation and the Australian Agricultural Industry
    LAND DEGRADATION AND THE AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY Paul Gretton Umme Salma STAFF INFORMATION PAPER 1996 INDUSTRY COMMISSION © Commonwealth of Australia 1996 ISBN This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, the work may be reproduced in whole or in part for study or training purposes, subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source. Reproduction for commercial usage or sale requires prior written permission from the Australian Government Publishing Service. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Manager, Commonwealth Information Services, AGPS, GPO Box 84, Canberra ACT 2601. Enquiries Paul Gretton Industry Commission PO Box 80 BELCONNEN ACT 2616 Phone: (06) 240 3252 Email: [email protected] The views expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect those of the Industry Commission. Forming the Productivity Commission The Federal Government, as part of its broader microeconomic reform agenda, is merging the Bureau of Industry Economics, the Economic Planning Advisory Commission and the Industry Commission to form the Productivity Commission. The three agencies are now co- located in the Treasury portfolio and amalgamation has begun on an administrative basis. While appropriate arrangements are being finalised, the work program of each of the agencies will continue. The relevant legislation will be introduced soon. This report has been produced by the Industry Commission. CONTENTS Abbreviations v Preface vii Overview
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Innovation in Agriculture
    IEA Current Controversies No.64 THE EFFECT OF INNOVATION IN AGRICULTURE ON THE ENVIRONMENT Matt Ridley and David Hill November 2018 Institute of Economic A airs 3 IEA Current Controversies papers are designed to promote discussion of economic issues and the role of markets in solving economic and social problems. As with all IEA publications, the views expressed are those of the author and not those of the Institute (which has no corporate view), its managing trustees, Academic Advisory Council or other senior staff. 4 Contents About the authors 6 Summary 8 Introduction 9 Part 1. Innovation in food production, Matt Ridley Introduction 13 The price of food 15 Land sparing versus land sharing 16 The state and future of British farming 19 Biotechnology 21 Precision farming and robotics 33 Other innovations and trends in farming practice 36 How key UK crops can be transformed by innovation 42 Bioenergy has significant environmental problems 49 Conclusions and recommendations 55 References 57 5 Part 2. A new countryside: restoration of biodiversity in the UK, David Hill Introduction 63 The State of Nature 68 Biodiversity conservation policy 72 Agriculture needs to improve its environmental performance 74 Land sharing and land sparing 77 Restoring nature and ecosystems in the UK 78 Interventions for biodiversity in the farmed landscape 80 Investing in the natural environment 86 Investment vehicles 91 Conclusion and recommendations 98 References 102 Acknowledgements 106 66 About the authors 77 Matt Ridley Matt Ridley’s books have sold over a million copies, been translated into 31 languages and won several awards. They include The Red Queen, Genome, The Rational Optimist and The Evolution of Everything.
    [Show full text]
  • China's Water-Energy-Food R Admap
    CHINA’S WATER-ENERGY-FOOD R ADMAP A Global Choke Point Report By Susan Chan Shifflett Jennifer L. Turner Luan Dong Ilaria Mazzocco Bai Yunwen March 2015 Acknowledgments The authors are grateful to the Energy Our CEF research assistants were invaluable Foundation’s China Sustainable Energy in producing this report from editing and fine Program and Skoll Global Threats Fund for tuning by Darius Izad and Xiupei Liang, to their core support to the China Water Energy Siqi Han’s keen eye in creating our infographics. Team exchange and the production of this The chinadialogue team—Alan Wang, Huang Roadmap. This report was also made possible Lushan, Zhao Dongjun—deserves a cheer for thanks to additional funding from the Henry Luce their speedy and superior translation of our report Foundation, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, blue into Chinese. At the last stage we are indebted moon fund, USAID, and Vermont Law School. to Katie Lebling who with a keen eye did the We are also in debt to the participants of the China final copyedits, whipping the text and citations Water-Energy Team who dedicated considerable into shape and CEF research assistant Qinnan time to assist us in the creation of this Roadmap. Zhou who did the final sharpening of the Chinese We also are grateful to those who reviewed the text. Last, but never least, is our graphic designer, near-final version of this publication, in particular, Kathy Butterfield whose creativity in design Vatsal Bhatt, Christine Boyle, Pamela Bush, always makes our text shine. Heather Cooley, Fred Gale, Ed Grumbine, Jia Shaofeng, Jia Yangwen, Peter V.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish-Farming: the New Driver of the Blue Economy
    BRUSSELS RURAL DEVELOPMENT BRIEFINGS A SERIES OF MEETINGS ON ACP-EU DEVELOPMENT ISSUES Fish-farming: the new driver of the blue economy This Reader was prepared by ,VROLQD%RWR0DQDJHU&7$%UXVVHOV2I´FH 6X]DQQH3KLOOLSVDQG0DULDHOHRQRUD'­$QGUHD5HVHDUFK$VVLVWDQWV&7$ Fish-farming: the new driver of the blue economy Briefing n. 32 This Reader was prepared by Isolina Boto, Manager, CTA Brussels Office Fish-farming: the Suzanne Phillips and Mariaeleonora new driver of the D’Andrea, Research Assistants, CTA blue economy The information in this document was compiled as background reading material for the 32 Brussels Development Briefing on Fish- Brussels, July 2013 farming: the new driver of the blue economy? The Reader and most of the resources are available at http:// brusselsbriefings.net Fish-farming: the new driver of the blue economy Table of content 1. Context International frameworks in support of aquaculture 2. Overview of the significance of the aquaculture sector 2.1. Aquaculture production systems 2.1.1. Main farmed species 2.2 Overview of production and trade in aquaculture globally 2.3 The significance of aquaculture sector in ACP countries 3. Food and nutrition security and poverty reduction: potential benefits deriving from aquaculture development 3.1 Empirical evidence of impact 4. Challenges for the development of sustainable aquaculture 4.1 Challenges to economic sustainability 4.2 Challenges to social sustainability 4.3 Challenges to environmental sustainability 5. Opportunities for aquaculture sustainable development 5.1. The drivers of sustainability 5.2. New niches and standards 5.3. Collective actions - Aquaculture producers organizations 5.4. Recognition of the role of women in aquaculture 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Intensive Farming
    The Impact of Capital Intensive Farming in Thailand: A Computable General Equilibrium Approach Anuwat Pue-on Dept of Accounting, Economics and Finance Lincoln University, New Zealand Bert D. Ward Dept of Accounting, Economics and Finance Lincoln University, New Zealand Christopher Gan Dept of Accounting, Economics and Finance Lincoln University, New Zealand Paper presented at the 2010 NZARES Conference Tahuna Conference Centre – Nelson, New Zealand. August 26-27, 2010. Copyright by author(s). Readers may make copies of this document for non-commercial purposes only, provided that this copyright notice appears on all such copies. The Impact of Capital Intensive Farming in Thailand: A Computable General Equilibrium Approach Anuwat Pue-on, Bert D. Ward, Christopher Gan Dept of Accounting, Economics and Finance Lincoln University, New Zealand Abstract The aim of this study is to explore whether efforts to encourage producers to use agricultural machinery and equipment will significantly improve agricultural productivity, income distribution amongst social groups, as well as macroeconomic performance in Thailand. A 2000 Social Accounting Matrix (SAM) of Thailand was constructed as a data set, and then a 20 production-sector Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model was developed for the Thai economy. The CGE model is employed to simulate the impact of capital-intensive farming on the Thai economy under two different scenarios: technological change and free trade. Four simulations were conducted. Simulation 1 increased the share parameter of capital in the agricultural sector by 5%. Simulation 2 shows a 5% increase in agricultural capital stock. A removal in import tariffs for agricultural machinery sector forms the basis for Simulation 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Intensive Livestock Farming: Global Trends, Increased Environmental Concerns, and Ethical Solutions
    J Agric Environ Ethics (2009) 22:153–167 DOI 10.1007/s10806-008-9136-3 Intensive Livestock Farming: Global Trends, Increased Environmental Concerns, and Ethical Solutions Ramona Cristina Ilea Accepted: 14 November 2008 / Published online: 11 December 2008 Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008 Abstract By 2050, global livestock production is expected to double—growing faster than any other agricultural sub-sector—with most of this increase taking place in the developing world. As the United Nation’s four-hundred-page report, Livestock’s Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options, documents, livestock production is now one of three most significant contributors to environmental problems, leading to increased greenhouse gas emissions, land degradation, water pollution, and increased health prob- lems. The paper draws on the UN report as well as a flurry of other recently published studies in order to demonstrate the effect of intensive livestock production on global warming and on people’s health. The paper’s goal is to outline the problems caused by intensive livestock farming and analyze a number of possible solutions, including legis- lative changes and stricter regulations, community mobilizing, and consumers choosing to decrease their demand for animal products. Keywords Agriculture Á Animals Á Environment Á Ethics Á Farming Á Livestock Á Meat Global Trends and Overview Approximately 56 billion land animals are raised and killed worldwide every year for human consumption (FAO, n.d.).1 By 2050, global farm animal production is expected to double—growing faster than any other agricultural sub-sector—with most of those increases taking place in the developing world (FAO 2006b, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Factory Farming: Assessing Investment Risks
    FACTORY FARMING: ASSESSING INVESTMENT RISKS 2016 report Find out more, or join us, at: fairr.org Follow us: @FAIRRinitiative FACTORY FARMING: KILLER STATS INVESTORS CAN’T IGNORE DOWN INVESTORS IN 52.3 reason for rapid user of MCDONALDS AND KFC O O antibiotics HIT BY US$10.8BN LOSS 27.6 N 1 spread of bird (H5N2) N 1 OF MARKET CAP IN 2014 DUE TO FOOD 11.4 and swine (H1N1) flu in the US SAFETY SCANDAL AT A CHINESE SUPPLIER 7.9 industry losses due to US bird of all antibiotics in the US now used UP 88.2 [FarmEcon] [CDC] $3.3bn flu outbreak in 2015 80% in animal factory farms ALTERNATIVE FOOD TECH COMPANY 65.3 HAMPTON CREEK SET TO BE FASTEST GROWING 59.9 FOOD COMPANY IN HISTORY, BENEFITING 12.7 FROM IMPACT OF 2015 85% US BIRD FLU CRISIS 66.2 of all soya DOWN 39.4 globally is used ANIMAL WELFARE in animal feeds, SCANDAL LEADS TO 57.1 a major cause of LARGEST MEAT RECALL deforestation [WWF] IN US HISTORY, 28.4 of global GHG AND BANKRUPTCY emissions, more FOR MEAT-PACKER 75.5 14% consumer HALLMARK/WESTLAND than the transport O IN 2012 24.9 N 1 of water in sector* [FAO] drought-stricken DOWN 11.4 INVESTORS IN TYSON [Pacific Institute] FOODS EXPOSED AFTER 7.9 * from livestock sector as a whole, with factory California COMPANY REVEALS farming as key component ENVIRONMENTAL 88.2 VIOLATIONS. rise in 'heat stress' days set to hit cattle and rising hit on profits of California POSSIBLE $500M OF 59.9 [UC Davis] 21% industry due to warming climate $250m dairies due to drought in 2015 REGULAR GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS AT RISK 12.7 fairr.org fairr.org | 1 KEY FINDINGS FOREWORD AND IMPLICATIONS FOR INVESTORS Animal factory farming is exposed to at least 28 environmental, social This report explores the industrialisation of the world’s meat and fish production, a relatively recent Increasingly, major investors and governance (ESG) issues that could significantly damage financial trend, and assesses the potential risks that a range are paying attention to value over the short or long-term.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Habitat Mitigates Feast–Famine Conditions Faced by Honey Bees in an Agricultural Landscape
    Native habitat mitigates feast–famine conditions faced FROM THE COVER by honey bees in an agricultural landscape Adam G. Dolezala,1,2, Ashley L. St. Clairb,c,1, Ge Zhangc, Amy L. Tothb,c, and Matthew E. O’Nealc aDepartment of Entomology, University of Illinois Urbana–Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801; bDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011; and cDepartment of Entomology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011 Edited by David L. Denlinger, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, and approved October 25, 2019 (received for review July 24, 2019) Intensive agriculture can contribute to pollinator decline, exempli- pathogen pressure, pesticide exposure, and nutritional shortages fied by alarmingly high annual losses of honey bee colonies in (9, 11, 21, 22), all associated with anthropogenic influence (23, 24). regions dominated by annual crops (e.g., midwestern United States). How do honey bees respond to landscapes that become in- As more natural or seminatural landscapes are transformed into creasingly dominated by intensive agriculture, particularly of crops monocultures, there is growing concern over current and future considered to have limited nutritional benefit? Nationwide surveys impacts on pollinators. To forecast how landscape simplification can have shown some of the worst colony losses occur in the mid- affect bees, we conducted a replicated, longitudinal assessment of western United States (16, 18, 25), a region of major agricultural honey bee colony growth and nutritional health in an intensively production (5). Furthermore, agricultural land use has been as- farmed region where much of the landscape is devoted to produc- sociated with lower amounts of protein in stored pollen (26), lower tion of corn and soybeans.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Food and Agriculture: Trends and Challenges
    1 ISSN 2522-7211 (print) ISSN 2522-7211 (online) ISSN 2522-722X The future of food and agriculture Trends and challenges The future of food and agriculture Trends and challenges Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome, 2017 Citation: FAO. 2017. The future of food and agriculture – Trends and challenges. Rome. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. ISBN 978-92-5-109551-5 © FAO, 2017 FAO encourages the use, reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product. Except where otherwise indicated, material may be copied, downloaded and printed for private study, research and teaching purposes, or for use in non-commercial products or services, provided that appropriate acknowledgement of FAO as the source and copyright holder is given and that FAO’s endorsement of users’ views, products or services is not implied in any way. All requests for translation and adaptation rights, and for resale and other commercial use rights should be made via www.fao.org/contact-us/licence-request or addressed to [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Oil | Agriculture | Metals | Carbon & Power | Dry Freight Top News
    Oil | Agriculture | Metals | Carbon & Power | Dry Freight Click on headers to go to that section Top News - Oil U.S. shale industry tempers output even as oil price "The quality of the acreage for privates is not as good as jumps the publics," Sheffield said, estimating private companies Even with oil prices surging toward $75 a barrel, U.S. account for 40% to 50% of U.S. rig count. shale producers are keeping their pledges to hold the line "We’re not seeing the upward pressure we would on spending and keep output flat, a departure from normally have predicted based on $73 oil," said Paul previous boom cycles. Mosvold, president and COO of driller Scandrill, which This year's run up in crude prices, and oil output curbs operates super-spec drilling rigs, equipment in high imposed by the OPEC+ producers group, historically demand since the oil market recovered. would have triggered a drilling boom. But investors are Mosvold reported a slight uptick in calls as oil prices have demanding financial returns over more volume and climbed, but said they are "not substantial." energy financiers are shifting to renewables, so shale firms are determined to stay disciplined. U.S. Supreme Court backs refineries in biofuel waiver "I'm still confident the producers will not respond" to the dispute run-up in prices, said Scott Sheffield, chief executive of The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday made it easier for Pioneer Natural Resources, the largest producer in the small oil refineries to win exemptions from a federal law Permian Basin shale field.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study in Buon Me Thuot City, Daklak, Vietnam
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Nguyen, Giang N. T.; Sarker, Tapan Article Sustainable coffee supply chain management: A case study in Buon Me Thuot City, Daklak, Vietnam International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility (JCSR) Provided in Cooperation with: CBS International Business School, Cologne Suggested Citation: Nguyen, Giang N. T.; Sarker, Tapan (2018) : Sustainable coffee supply chain management: A case study in Buon Me Thuot City, Daklak, Vietnam, International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility (JCSR), ISSN 2366-0074, Springer, Cham, Vol. 3, Iss. 1, pp. 1-17, http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40991-017-0024-x This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/217410 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence.
    [Show full text]