IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/joafsc/359637.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional Dimensions of Farmland Conservation: Applying the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) Framework to the U.S. Conservation Reserve Program

Author

Listed:
  • Morrison, Kerri
  • Hardy, Scott

Abstract

The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) invites agricultural producers in the U.S. to voluntarily place land into conservation for 10 to 15 years. The program currently focuses on reducing soil erosion, increasing soil health, providing wildlife habitat, and improving water quality throughout the United States. This study employs a theoretical framework for the understanding of collective action institutions (sets of rules prohibiting, requiring, or permitting specified actions that are established to overcome common problems) in order to examine the external factors, internal structures, and policy decisions of CRP and the impacts these variables have on program outcomes. We collected the data using open-ended, structured interviews with stakeholders associated with the program, and from government documents produced on the CRP by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and other local, state, and federal agencies. Results indicate that the biophysical environment, local culture, and institutional rules greatly contribute to program implementation (resources for conservation, decision-making structures, and management strategies) and outcomes (amount and type of land conserved, and level of participation by agricultural landowners).

Suggested Citation

  • Morrison, Kerri & Hardy, Scott, 2014. "Institutional Dimensions of Farmland Conservation: Applying the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) Framework to the U.S. Conservation Reserve Program," Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, Center for Transformative Action, Cornell University, vol. 4(4).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:joafsc:359637
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/359637/files/262.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Assogba, Noel Perceval & Zhang, Daowei, 2022. "The conservation reserve program and timber prices in the southern United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    2. Santiago Izquierdo-Tort & Seema Jayachandran & Santiago Saavedra, 2024. "Redesigning payments for ecosystem services to increase cost-effectiveness," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-11, December.
    3. Kelly, Peter & Huo, Xuexi, 2013. "Do farmers or governments make better land conservation choices? Evidence from China's Sloping Land Conversion Program," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 32-60.
    4. Ueda, Kohei & Hand, Michael S. & Farrigan, Tracey L., 2010. "Farmers in Low Socioeconomic Status Counties Enroll Less Land, Receive Less CRP Funding Per Acre," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 60980, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Chang, Hung-Hao & Boisvert, Richard N., "undated". "The Conservation Reserve Program, Off-Farm Work, and Farm Household Technical Efficiencies," Working Papers 57034, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    6. Chang, Hung-Hao & Chen, Yu-Hui, 2011. "Are participators in the land retirement program likely to grow energy crops?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(9), pages 3183-3188.
    7. Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Gunnar Breustedt, 2019. "Using choice experiments to improve the design of agri-environmental schemes," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(3), pages 495-528.
    8. Wu, Feng & Guan, Zhengfei & Yu, Fan & Myers, Robert J., 2013. "The spillover effects of biofuel policy on participation in the conservation reserve program," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1755-1770.
    9. Joshua M. Duke & Robert J. Johnston & Amy L. Shober & Zhongyuan Liu, 2023. "Improving targeting of farmers for enrollment in agri‐environmental programs," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(2), pages 1072-1096, June.
    10. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley, 2015. "Nudging farmers to sign agri-environmental contracts: the effects of a collective bonus," Working Papers hal-01148581, HAL.
    11. Eugene Adjei & Jingfang Zhang & Wendiam Sawadgo & Wenying Li, 2024. "Nonlinear effects of conservation reserve program rental rates on land enrollment under varying crop price regimes," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(3), pages 1038-1064, September.
    12. Laure Kuhfuss & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Nudging farmers to enrol land into agri-environmental schemes: the role of a collective bonus," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 43(4), pages 609-636.
    13. Mitani, Yohei & Shimada, Hideki, 2021. "Self-selection bias in estimating the determinants of landowners' Re-enrollment decisions in forest incentive programs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    14. Hung-Hao Chang, 2017. "Does A Social Welfare Program Affect Farmland Use? Empirical Evidence Using Administrative Data in Taiwan," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 441-457.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    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:joafsc:359637. 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: .

    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.