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! ]

Multiple Benefits of Carbon-Friendly Agricultural Practices: Empirical Assessment of Conservation Tillage in Iowa

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Kurkalova, Lyubov
Kling, Catherine L.
Zhao, Jinhua

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In this study, we estimate empirically the multiple benefits of a subsidy policy that would offer payments to farmers in return for the adoption of conservation tillage and compare the outcomes of alternative targeting designs for such a policy. Using data for roughly 12,000 National Resource Inventory (NRI) points, we simulate for the state of Iowa the least-cost policy schemes for offering payment incentives. We use an economic model of conservation tillage adoption to evaluate the costs of adoption, and we use a model that simulates physical processes (Environmental Policy Integrated Climate, or EPIC) to estimate the environmental benefits of adoption at each of the NRI points. We assess the costs and environmental consequences of two targeting options. The first is a practice-based policy instrument that maximizes the acres of land in conservation tillage, regardless of the level of environmental benefits achieved. The second is a performance-based instrument that yields the highest amount of environmental benefits per dollar spent. We consider four performance-based benefits: carbon sequestration in agricultural soils, reduction in nitrogen runoff, reduction of erosion of soil by wind, and reduction of erosion of soil by water. We find that the practice-based instrument provides high proportions of the four benefits relative to the performance-based instrument, especially at higher budget levels. Similarly, we estimate that targeting one of the four benefits provides high percentages of the other benefits compared to the amounts obtainable if they were targeted directly. Keywords: conservation tillage, multiple benefits, subsidy policy, targeting.

Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Iowa State University, Department of Economics in its series Staff General Research Papers with number 10194.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 17 Feb 2003
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Environmental Management, August 2004, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 519-527.
Handle: RePEc:isu:genres:10194

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Iowa State University, Dept. of Economics, 260 Heady Hall, Ames, IA 50011-1070
Phone: +1 515.294.6741
Fax: +1 515.294.0221
Email:
Web page: http://www.econ.iastate.edu
More information through EDIRC

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

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: 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. GR Pautsch & LA Kurkalova & BA Babcock & CL Kling, 2001. "The Efficiency Of Sequestering Carbon In Agricultural Soils," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 19(2), pages 123-134, 04. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Andrew J. Plantinga & JunJie Wu, 2003. "Co-Benefits from Carbon Sequestration in Forests: Evaluating Reductions in Agricultural Externalities from an Afforestation Policy in Wisconsin," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(1), pages 74-85. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Antle, John & Capalbo, Susan & Mooney, Sian & Elliott, Edward & Paustian, Keith, 2003. "Spatial heterogeneity, contract design, and the efficiency of carbon sequestration policies for agriculture," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 231-250, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Kurkalova, Lyubov & Kling, Catherine & Zhao, Jinhua, 2001. "The Subsidy For Adopting Conservation Tillage: Estimation From Observed Behavior," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20542, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association). [Downloadable!]
  5. Kurkalova, Lyubov A. & Kling, Catherine L. & Zhao, Jinhua, 2001. "Subsidy for Adopting Conservation Tillage: Estimation from Observed Behavior (The)," Staff General Research Papers 2007, Iowa State University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
  6. Pautsch, Gregory R. & Kurkalova, Lyubov A. & Babcock, Bruce A. & Kling, Catherine L., 2000. "Efficiency of Sequestering Carbon in Agricultural Soils (The)," Staff General Research Papers 1870, Iowa State University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
Full references

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.)

  1. Feng, Hong-Li & Kurkalova, Lyubov & Kling, Catherine L. & Gassman, Philip W., 2005. "Economic and Environmental Co-benefits of Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Soils: Retiring Agricultural Land in the Upper Mississippi River Basin," Staff General Research Papers 12253, Iowa State University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  2. Secchi, Silvia & Jha, Manoj & Kurkalova, Lyubov & Feng, HongLi & Gassman, Philip W. & Kling, Catherine L., 2005. "Designation of Co-benefits and Its Implication for Policy: Water Quality versus Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Soils, The," Staff General Research Papers 12264, Iowa State University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. Hongli Feng & Catherine L. Kling & Philip W. Gassman, 2004. "Carbon Sequestration, Co-Benefits, and Conservation Programs," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 04-wp379, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  4. Stavins, Robert & Plantinga, Andrew & Lubowski, Ruben, 2005. "Land-Use Change and Carbon Sinks," Discussion Papers dp-05-04, Resources For the Future. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? To receive notification of recent additions to the database, subscribe to the free NEP reports.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-13.


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.