Farmer’s subjective elicited water response function for intensive olives and compromise programming method for irrigation supply decision | Función subjetiva de respuesta al agua del agricultor en olivar intenso y la programación compromiso para decisiones

[EN] This research analyses the subjective crop yield-water relationship and proposes a method to determine water supply in irrigated olives. The probability density for water response functions (PDF) is elicited from a series of interviews carried out on a wide group of farmers. The elicitation technique is based upon the triangular distribution (highest possible, most frequent and lowest possible) and estimates of yield related to water supply (low, ‘normal’ and full irrigation). The model presented illustrates the possibility of implementing simple decision models to support farmers to manage water considering the objectives of maximizing profit and minimizing risk

[ES] La investigación analiza la función subjetiva de producción de agua (respuesta producción-riego). Se han obtenido funciones de densidad de probabilidad de respuesta al riego basadas en la función triangular (rendimiento ‘más probable’, ‘pesimista’ y ‘optimista’) correspondientes a diferentes dosis de riego (‘completo’, ‘medio’ y ‘bajo’). A partir de esta información se plantea un modelo de decisión de tipo normativo para determinar la dosis óptima de riego en olivar intensivo que incluye rentabilidad esperada y riesgo entendido como la probabilidad de no alcanzar un umbral prefijado de ingresos

SWORD

Berbel, J.; Gutiérrez-Martín, C. (2015). Farmer’s subjective elicited water response function for intensive olives and compromise programming method for irrigation supply decision. Economía Agraria y Recursos Naturales - Agricultural and Resource Economics. 15(2):51-68. https://doi.org/10.7201/earn.2015.02.03

2

This research has been financed by Secretaría General de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (MINECO). We thank our colleagues L. Mateos and F. Orgaz who provided insight and expertise that greatly assisted the research, and we also thank to the anonymous reviewers whose comments improved the earlier version of the manuscript.

68

51

15