There is a growing body of literature on the costs of sequestering carbon. However, no studies have examined the interplay between farm commodity programs and carbon sequestration programs. This study investigates two dimensions of the interaction between farm commodity programs and afforestation programs, using a price-endogenous sector model of agriculture in the United States. First, this study compares the fiscal and welfare costs of achieving specific carbon targets through afforestation, with and without current farm programs. Second, it examines the welfare, fiscal, and carbon consequences of replacing existing farm subsidies, wholly or in part, with payments for carbon. Two approaches, Hicksian and Marshallian, are investigated. In the first, the sector model is used to quantify the carbon consequences and fiscal costs associated with various combinations of farm commodity and carbon sequestration programs that leave consumers and producers in the U.S. agricultural sector no worse off than under existing farm programs. The second approach focuses on the carbon and welfare consequences of various farm commodity and carbon sequestration programs that hold total program fiscal costs constant at current levels. Althouth the methodology and data are applied to the United States, the issues addressed are common in a number of developed nations, particularly within the European Union (EU). Adapting existing sector models in these nations to perform similar analyses would provide policy makers with more precise information about the nature of the trade-offs involved with second-best policies for replacing farm commodity subsidies with tree planting subsidies. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 7 (1996) Issue (Month): 1 (January) Pages: 15-43 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)