IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea13/149976.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Which is the lower-cost conservation strategy: long- or short-term agreements?

Author

Listed:
  • Hansen, LeRoy
  • Hellerstein, Daniel

Abstract

Historically, long-term agreements offer an upfront payment as opposed to a series of annual payments. Past research suggests that public preferences for upfront payments are greater than the present-value sum of a series of annual payments. If this condition holds, then program costs can be lowered by offering upfront payments. The driving force behind this condition is that individuals’ have personal rates of discount (PRD) that exceed market discount rates. The objective of this analysis is to use behavior data to test whether landowners’ have PRDs that exceed market. We use contract data from three USDA wetland conservation strategies. Two of the strategies offer annual payments and one offers an upfront payment. This variation allows us to directly test the hypothesis that there is no difference between prds and the market rate. Our results lead us to reject this hypothesis.

Suggested Citation

  • Hansen, LeRoy & Hellerstein, Daniel, 2013. "Which is the lower-cost conservation strategy: long- or short-term agreements?," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149976, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea13:149976
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.149976
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/149976/files/Hansen%202013%20AAEA%20Poster%20.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.149976?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy; Public Economics; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea13:149976. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.