Do Increased Commodity Prices Lead To More Or Less Soil Degradation?
In this paper, a dynamic economic model is used to analyze the conflicting impacts of crop increasing/land degrading inputs with those of soil conserving/crop reducing inputs in problems of soil degradation in agriculture. Soil is a renewable resource that is generated naturally at a slow, essentially autonomous rate. Cultivation enhances crop production and degrades the soil, while conservation is unproductive for the crop but improves the soil resource. If the effects of cultivation dominate the effects of conservation in the soil dynamics, an increase in the price of the crop accelerates the rate of soil degradation In the short-run and decreases the long-run stock of the soil resource. On the other hand, if the effects of conservation dominate the effects of cultivation, an increase in the price of the crop decelerates the rate of soil degradation in the short run and increases the long-run stock of the soil resource. It is shown that subsidies on conservation activities or taxes on cultivation intensity may well decrease the long-run soil stock, although strong conditions must be satisfied for either of these results to hold. It also is shown that a reduction in the real discount rate or a direct per unit tax on soil losses is certain to increase the long-run soil stock and reduce the short-run rate of soil degradation.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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): 36 (1992)
Issue (Month): 1 (04)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: AARES Central Office Manager, Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU, Canberra ACT 0200|
Phone: 0409 032 338
Web page: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8489
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://ordering.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/subs.asp?ref=1467-8489&doi=10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8489|
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.:
- Askari, Hossein & Cummings, John Thomas, 1977. "Estimating Agricultural Supply Response with the Nerlove Model: A Survey," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 18(2), pages 257-92, June.
- Caputo, Michael R., 1990. "How to do comparative dynamics on the back of an envelope in optimal control theory," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 14(3-4), pages 655-683, October.
- Araujo, A & Scheinkman, Jose A, 1977. "Smoothness, Comparative Dynamics, and the Turnpike Property," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(3), pages 601-20, April.
- McLaren, Keith R & Cooper, Russel J, 1980. "Intertemporal Duality: Application to the Theory of the Firm," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(7), pages 1755-62, November.
- Moore, Walter B. & McCarl, Bruce A., 1987. "Off-Site Costs Of Soil Erosion: A Case Study In The Willamette Valley," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 12(01), July.
- Hartl, Richard F., 1987. "A simple proof of the monotonicity of the state trajectories in autonomous control problems," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 211-215, February.
- Oniki, Hajime, 1973. "Comparative dynamics (sensitivity analysis) in optimal control theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 265-283, June.
- Kamien, Morton I. & Schwartz, Nancy L., 1971. "Sufficient conditions in optimal control theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 207-214, June.
- LaFrance, Jeffrey T. & Barney, L. Dwayne, 1991. "The envelope theorem in dynamic optimization," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 355-385, April.
- Michael R. Caputo, 1990. "Comparative Dynamics via Envelope Methods in Variational Calculus," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 57(4), pages 689-697.
- John Quiggin, 1988. "Murray River Salinity—An Illustrative Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(3), pages 635-645.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ajarec:v:36:y:1992:i:1:p:57-82. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)or (Christopher F. Baum)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.