IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea06/21438.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Working-Land Conservation Structures: Evidence on Program and Non-Program Participants

Author

Listed:
  • Lambert, Dayton M.
  • Schaible, Glenn D.
  • Johansson, Robert C.
  • Daberkow, Stan G.

Abstract

In recent years, the Federal government has placed more emphasis on working-land conservation programs. Farmers can be reimbursed for adopting certain conservation practices, such as the installation of in-field or perimeter conservation structures, to enhance water quality and soil productivity. In an effort to better understand the relationships between operator motivations, program incentives, and the environmental benefits of conservation programs, a multi-agency survey, the Conservation Effects Assessment Project-Agricultural Resources Management Survey (CEAP-ARMS), was conducted in 2004 across 16 states representing more than one-million farmers growing wheat. The nationally representative survey integrates Natural Resources Inventory (NRI) data on field-level physical characteristics, program information, farm-level costs of production, and farm household information. This objective of this paper is twofold. First, using the CEAP-ARMS, farm structure, household, and operator characteristics of farmers participating in one or more conservation programs are compared with farmers not participating in a conservation program. Second, an impact model is specified to test whether program participants allocated more acres to in-field or perimeter conservation structures than nonparticipants, holding other factors constant. Evidence suggests that program participants allocate more field acres to vegetative conservation structures than nonparticipants with in-field or perimeter conservation structures.

Suggested Citation

  • Lambert, Dayton M. & Schaible, Glenn D. & Johansson, Robert C. & Daberkow, Stan G., 2006. "Working-Land Conservation Structures: Evidence on Program and Non-Program Participants," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21438, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea06:21438
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.21438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/21438/files/sp06la03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.21438?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lynch, Lori & Hardie, Ian W. & Parker, Douglas D., 2002. "Analyzing Agricultural Landowners' Willingness To Install Streamside Buffers," Working Papers 28570, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    2. Meredith J. Soule & Abebayehu Tegene & Keith D. Wiebe, 2000. "Land Tenure and the Adoption of Conservation Practices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 993-1005.
    3. Boisvert, Richard N. & Chang, Hung-Hao, 2005. "Explaining Participation in the Conservation Reserve Program and its Effects on Farm Productivity and Efficiency," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19321, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Lambert, Dayton M. & Sullivan, Patrick & Claassen, Roger & Foreman, Linda F., 2006. "Conservation-Compatible Practices and Programs: Who Participates?," Economic Research Report 7255, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    5. Caswell, Margriet & Fuglie, Keith O. & Ingram, Cassandra & Jans, Sharon & Kascak, Catherine, 2001. "Adoption of Agricultural Production Practices: Lessons Learned from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Area Studies Project," Agricultural Economic Reports 33985, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Madhu Khanna, 2001. "Sequential Adoption of Site-Specific Technologies and its Implications for Nitrogen Productivity: A Double Selectivity Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(1), pages 35-51.
    7. Fishe, Raymond P. H. & Trost, R. P. & Lurie, Philip M., 1981. "Labor force earnings and college choice of young women: An examination of selectivity bias and comparative advantage," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 169-191, April.
    8. Luanne Lohr & Timothy A. Park, 1995. "Utility-Consistent Discrete-Continuous Choices in Soil Conservation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 71(4), pages 474-490.
    9. Cameron,A. Colin & Trivedi,Pravin K., 2005. "Microeconometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521848053, November.
    10. Kott, Phillip S., 2001. "Using the Delete-a-Group Jackknife Variance Estimator in NASS Surveys," NASS Research Reports 235089, United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service.
    11. Hisham El-Osta & Ashok Mishra & Mary Ahearn, 2004. "Labor Supply by Farm Operators Under “Decoupled” Farm Program Payments," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 367-385, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wade, Tara & Kurkalova, Lyubov A. & Secchi, Silvia, 2012. "Using the logit model with aggregated choice data in estimation of Iowa corn farmers’ conservation tillage subsidies," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124974, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lambert, Dayton M. & Sullivan, Patrick, 2006. "Conservation Reserve Program Participation and Acreage Enrollment of Working Farms," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21361, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    3. Joseph Cooper & Giovanni Signorello, 2008. "Farmer Premiums for the Voluntary Adoption of Conservation Plans," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(1), pages 1-14.
    4. Gedikoglu, Haluk, 2013. "A Comprehensive Analysis of Adoption of Energy Crops, GM Crops and Conservation Practices," 2013 Annual Meeting, February 2-5, 2013, Orlando, Florida 142928, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Haluk Gedikoglu & Sansel Tandogan & Joseph Parcell, 2023. "Neighbor effects on adoption of conservation practices: cases of grass filter systems and injecting manure," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 70(3), pages 723-756, June.
    6. Obedy Eric, Gido, 2012. "Factors Affecting Adoption and Intensity of Use of Organic Soil Management Practices in Maize Production in Bungoma County, Kenya," Research Theses 243445, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    7. Hung-Hao Chang & Richard N. Boisvert, 2009. "Distinguishing between Whole-Farm vs. Partial-Farm Participation in the Conservation Reserve Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(1), pages 144-161.
    8. Hand, Michael S. & Nickerson, Cynthia J., 2009. "The Role of Cost-Share Rates and Prices on the Size of Conservation Investments in EQIP," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49257, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Musser, Wesley N. & Lambert, Dayton M. & Daberkow, Stan G., 2006. "Factors Affecting Direct and Indirect Energy Use in U.S. Corn Production," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21063, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Gedikoglu, Haluk & Parcell, Joseph L., 2013. "Impact of Earned and Unearned Off-Farm Income on Adoption of New Technologies," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149702, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Claassen, Roger & Cattaneo, Andrea & Johansson, Robert, 2008. "Cost-effective design of agri-environmental payment programs: U.S. experience in theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 737-752, May.
    12. Chang, Hung-Hao & Boisvert, Richard N., 2005. "Are Farmers' Decisions to Work off the Farm and Participate in the Conservation Reserve Program Independent, Joint or Sequential?," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19474, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Lichtenberg, Erik, 2004. "Cost-Responsiveness of Conservation Practice Adoption: A Revealed Preference Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 29(3), pages 1-16, December.
    14. Banerjee, Swagata (Ban) & Martin, Steven W. & Roberts, Roland K. & Larson, James A. & Hogan, Robert J., Jr. & Johnson, Jason L. & Paxton, Kenneth W. & Reeves, Jeanne M., 2007. "Adoption of Conservation-Tillage Practices in Cotton Production," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34842, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    15. Gedikoglu, Haluk & McCann, Laura M.J. & Artz, Georgeanne M., 2011. "Off-Farm Employment Effects on Adoption of Nutrient Management Practices," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 1-14, August.
    16. Sheng Gong & Jason.S. Bergtold & Elizabeth Yeager, 2021. "Assessing the joint adoption and complementarity between in-field conservation practices of Kansas farmers," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, December.
    17. Matthew Houser, 2022. "Does adopting a nitrogen best management practice reduce nitrogen fertilizer rates?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 79-94, March.
    18. Johansson, Robert C. & Kara, Erdal & Ribaudo, Marc, 2006. "On how environmental stringency influences BMP adoption," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21207, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Naveen Adusumilli & Rowell Dikitanan & Hua Wang, 2019. "Effect of Cost-Sharing Federal Programs on Adoption of Water Conservation Practices: Results from Propensity Score Matching Approach," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(01), pages 1-16, July.
    20. Giovanopoulou, Eirini & Nastis, Stefanos A. & Papanagiotou, Evagelos, 2011. "Modeling farmer participation in agri-environmental nitrate pollution reducing schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2175-2180, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:aaea06:21438. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.