Michele Graziano Ceddia
MODUL University Vienna
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Michele Graziano Ceddia.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2011
Eli P. Fenichel; Carlos Castillo-Chavez; Michele Graziano Ceddia; Gerardo Chowell; Paula Andrea Gonzalez Parra; Graham J. Hickling; Garth Holloway; Richard D. Horan; Benjamin Morin; Charles Perrings; Michael Springborn; Leticia Velázquez; Cristina Villalobos
The science and management of infectious disease are entering a new stage. Increasingly public policy to manage epidemics focuses on motivating people, through social distancing policies, to alter their behavior to reduce contacts and reduce public disease risk. Person-to-person contacts drive human disease dynamics. People value such contacts and are willing to accept some disease risk to gain contact-related benefits. The cost–benefit trade-offs that shape contact behavior, and hence the course of epidemics, are often only implicitly incorporated in epidemiological models. This approach creates difficulty in parsing out the effects of adaptive behavior. We use an epidemiological–economic model of disease dynamics to explicitly model the trade-offs that drive person-to-person contact decisions. Results indicate that including adaptive human behavior significantly changes the predicted course of epidemics and that this inclusion has implications for parameter estimation and interpretation and for the development of social distancing policies. Acknowledging adaptive behavior requires a shift in thinking about epidemiological processes and parameters.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2014
Michele Graziano Ceddia; Nicholas Bardsley; Sergio Gomez-y-Paloma; Sabine Sedlacek
Significance Tropical South America has forest resources of global significance but exhibits a relatively high rate of deforestation. As agricultural expansion remains the most important cause of forest loss and degradation there, it is important to understand its main drivers. In this paper we address two important questions: How do the quality of governance and agricultural intensification combine to impact the spatial expansion of agriculture? Which aspects of governance are more likely to ensure that agricultural intensification allows sparing land for nature? By distinguishing between conventional and environmental dimensions of governance (which includes also the establishment of protected areas), we investigate which of these two aspects, by interacting with the process of agricultural intensification, is likely to promote land sparing. In this paper we address two topical questions: How do the quality of governance and agricultural intensification impact on spatial expansion of agriculture? Which aspects of governance are more likely to ensure that agricultural intensification allows sparing land for nature? Using data from the Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Bank, the World Database on Protected Areas, and the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, we estimate a panel data model for six South American countries and quantify the effects of major determinants of agricultural land expansion, including various dimensions of governance, over the period 1970–2006. The results indicate that the effect of agricultural intensification on agricultural expansion is conditional on the quality and type of governance. When considering conventional aspects of governance, agricultural intensification leads to an expansion of agricultural area when governance scores are high. When looking specifically at environmental aspects of governance, intensification leads to a spatial contraction of agriculture when governance scores are high, signaling a sustainable intensification process.
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics | 2011
Michele Graziano Ceddia; Mark Bartlett; Caterina De Lucia; Charles Perrings
Pollen-mediated gene flow is one of the main concerns associated with the introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops. Should a premium for non-GM varieties emerge on the market, ‘contamination’ by GM pollen would generate a revenue loss for growers of non-GM varieties. This paper analyses the problem of pollen-mediated gene flow as a particular type of production externality. The model, although simple, provides useful insights into coexistence policies. Following on from this and taking GM herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape (Brassica napus) as a model crop, a Monte Carlo simulation is used to generate data and then estimate the effect of several important policy variables (including width of buffer zones and spatial aggregation) on the magnitude of the externality associated with pollen-mediated gene flow.
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics | 2008
Michele Graziano Ceddia; Jaakko Heikkilä; Jukka Peltola
One component of biosecurity is protection against invasive alien species, which are one of the most important threats worldwide to native biodiversity and economic profitability in various sectors, including agriculture. However, agricultural producers are not homogeneous. They may have different objectives and priorities, use different technologies, and occupy heterogeneous parcels of land. If the producers differ in terms of their attitude towards invasive pests and the damages they cause, there are probably external effects in the form of pest spread impacts and subsequent damages caused. We study such impacts in the case of two producer types: profit-seeking professional producers and utility-seeking hobby producers. We show that the hobby producer, having first set a breeding ground for the pest, under-invests in pest control. We also discuss potential policy instruments to correct this market failure and highlight the importance of considering different stakeholders and their heterogeneous incentives when designing policies to control invasive alien species.
Global Environmental Change-human and Policy Dimensions | 2013
Michele Graziano Ceddia; Sabine Sedlacek; Nicholas Bardsley; S. Gomez-y-Paloma
Ecological Economics | 2009
Michele Graziano Ceddia; J. Heikkilä; Jukka Peltola
Ecological Economics | 2013
Michele Graziano Ceddia; Nicholas Bardsley; Robin Goodwin; Garth Holloway; Giuseppe Nocella; Antonio Stasi
Land Use Policy | 2017
Michele Graziano Ceddia; Elena Zepharovich
Environmental Science & Policy | 2016
Yeray Hernández-González; Michele Graziano Ceddia; Elena Zepharovich; Dimitris Christopoulos
Environmental and Resource Economics | 2012
Michele Graziano Ceddia