This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Cost Effective Targeting Of Land Retirement To Improve Water Quality: A Multi-Watershed Analysis

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Yang, Wanhong
Khanna, Madhu
Farnsworth, Richard
Onal, Hayri
Abstract

An integrated watershed management framework that combines economic, hydrologic and GIS modeling is developed to study cost effective land retirement in multiple watersheds to achieve off-site sediment reduction goal. This integrated framework examines two alternative standards-a uniform standard under which each watershed is required to achieve the same sediment reduction goal and a non-uniform standard under which marginal cost of sediment abatement is equal across watersheds. Furthermore, for each standard, costs of abatement under two alternative rental instruments based on marginal cost of sediment abatement ($/ton) and uniform payments per acre ($/acre) are examined. Then the cost effectiveness of the four policy options (uniform standard with $/ton and $/acre instrument, non-uniform standard with $/ton and $/acre instrument) is discussed. The integrated framework is applied to 12 agricultural watersheds in Illinois Conservation Reserve Enhancement program (CREP) region. The watersheds varied in size between 29,995 and 70,849 acres. Cropland within 900 feet of streams-129,955 acres (33.4% of all cropland in the 12 watersheds)-is considered eligible for enrollment into the CREP. Consistent with Illinois'’ program, a sediment reduction goal of 20% is selected for all of the simulations. Policy implications from the empirical results are quite interesting. With either a $/ton or a $/acre instrument, the non-uniform standard, which equalizes marginal cost of abatement across watersheds, outperforms the uniform standard policy. With either a uniform or non-uniform standard, a $/ton instrument outperforms a $/acre instrument. The least preferred policy option, the uniform standard with a $/acre instrument, is 2.5 times as costly as the most preferred policy option, the non-uniform standard with a $/ton instrument. These results suggest that program administrators may want to consider a program that includes a non-uniform standard and a rental payment instrument based on marginal cost of abatement in order to achieve their objectives at least cost.

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.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/20687
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association) in its series 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL with number 20687.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2001
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea01:20687

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Email:
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).

Related research
Keywords: Land Economics/Use;

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

  1. Anastasia Lintner & Alfons Weersink, 1999. "Endogenous Transport Coefficients: Implications for Improving Water Quality from Multi-Contaminants in an Agricultural Watershed," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(2), pages 269-296, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Babcock, Bruce A. & Lakshminarayan, P. G. & Wu, JunJie & Zilberman, David, 1997. "Economics of a Public Fund for Environmental Amenities (The)," Staff General Research Papers 1065, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  3. Huang, Wen-Yuan & Uri, Noel D., 1992. "An assessment of alternative agricultural policies to reduce nitrogen fertilizer use," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 213-234, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Parks P. J. & Kramer R. A., 1995. "A Policy Simulation of the Wetlands Reserve Program," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 223-240, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? A tutorial is available.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-26.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.