IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/canjag/v67y2019i1p15-30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A dynamic analysis of cost‐share agri‐environmental programs

Author

Listed:
  • James Vercammen

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to theoretically examine the efficiency of a cost‐share agri‐environmental program through a farm life cycle lens. Faced with a growing environmental impact from agricultural production, the farmer must decide when and how aggressively to invest in environmental capital. The steady state of the optimal control problem reveals the trade‐off between allocating farm profits to consumption versus environmental improvements. A payment from a cost‐share program reduces the time to investment in environmental capital, and also permanently increases the farmer's level of investment. A lack of targeting results in inframarginal farmers being paid more than the minimum amount that is required to induce investment. The portion of both the marginal payment and the average payment that induces new investment declines as the government's share of the payment increases, and this decline decreases overall program efficiency. Despite this inefficiency, a larger payment from a cost‐share program is shown to decrease the farm's environmental impact in both the short and long run. Le but de cet article est d'examiner théoriquement l'efficacité d'un programme agroenvironnemental à coûts partagés dans une perspective du cycle de vie d'une ferme. Face à l'impact croissant de la production agricole sur l'environnement, l'agriculteur doit décider quand, et à quel niveau, investir dans le capital environnemental. L'état d'équilibre du problème de contrôle optimal révèle le compromis entre l'affectation des bénéfices de l'exploitation à la consommation et l'amélioration de l'environnement. Un paiement provenant d'un programme à coûts partagés réduit le temps nécessaire à l'investissement dans le capital environnemental et augmente de façon permanente le niveau d'investissement de l'agriculteur. Un manque de ciblage a pour résultat que les agriculteurs inframarginaux reçoivent une rémunération supérieure au montant minimum requis pour générer des investissements. La part du paiement marginal et du paiement moyen qui induit de nouveaux investissements diminue au fur et à mesure que la part du gouvernement dans le paiement augmente, ce qui diminue l'efficacité globale du programme. Malgré cette inefficacité, il a été démontré qu'un paiement plus important provenant d'un programme à frais partagés diminuait l'impact environnemental de la ferme à court et à long terme.

Suggested Citation

  • James Vercammen, 2019. "A dynamic analysis of cost‐share agri‐environmental programs," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 67(1), pages 15-30, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:67:y:2019:i:1:p:15-30
    DOI: 10.1111/cjag.12193
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12193
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/cjag.12193?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mariano Mezzatesta & David A. Newburn & Richard T. Woodward, 2013. "Additionality and the Adoption of Farm Conservation Practices," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(4), pages 722-742.
    2. Gulati, Sumeet & Vercammen, James, 2006. "Time inconsistent resource conservation contracts," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 454-468, July.
    3. Arrow, Kenneth & Bolin, Bert & Costanza, Robert & Dasgupta, Partha & Folke, Carl & Holling, C.S. & Jansson, Bengt-Owe & Levin, Simon & Mäler, Karl-Göran & Perrings, Charles & Pimentel, David, 1996. "Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 104-110, February.
    4. Gruver, Gene W., 1976. "Optimal investment in pollution control capital in a neoclassical growth context," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 165-177, October.
    5. Claassen, Roger & Duquette, Eric & Horowitz, John & Kohei, Ueda, 2014. "Additionality in U.S. Agricultural Conservation and Regulatory Offset Programs," Economic Research Report 180414, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Murray Fulton & James Vercammen, 2009. "Optimal Two-Part Pricing in a Carbon Offset Market: A Comparison of Organizational Types," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(2), pages 513-532, October.
    7. Murray Fulton & James Vercammen, 2014. "Optimal NGO Financing of a Resource Management Certification Scheme," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(4), pages 605-626, August.
    8. Walter N. Thurman & Dominic P. Parker, 2011. "Crowding Out Open Space: The Effects of Federal Land Programs on Private Land Trust Conservation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(2), pages 202-222.
    9. Govindasamy, Ramu & Cochran, Mark J., 1997. "An Economic Evaluation of Adoption of the Conservation Compliance Program: A Stochastic Dominance Approach," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13.
    10. James Vercammen, 2019. "A Welfare Analysis of Conservation Easement Tax Credits," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(1), pages 43-71.
    11. Gulati, Sumeet & Vercammen, James, 2005. "The Optimal Length of an Agricultural Carbon Contract," Working Papers 37027, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    12. Frederick Ploeg & Cees Withagen, 1991. "Pollution control and the Ramsey problem," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 1(2), pages 215-236, June.
    13. Casey B. Mulligan & Xavier Sala-i-Martin, 1991. "A Note on the Time-Elimination Method For Solving Recursive Dynamic Economic Models," NBER Technical Working Papers 0116, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Sumeet Gulati & James Vercammen, 2005. "The Optimal Length of an Agricultural Carbon Contract," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(4), pages 359-373, December.
    15. Rebecca Epanchin-Niell & Yusuke Kuwayama & Margaret Walls, 2017. "Spatial-Dynamic Complexities of Climate Challenge for Rural Areas: Integrating Resource and Regional Economic Insights," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(2), pages 447-463.
    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. Lennox, Gareth D. & Armsworth, Paul R., 2011. "Suitability of short or long conservation contracts under ecological and socio-economic uncertainty," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(15), pages 2856-2866.
    2. Juutinen, Artti & Ollikainen, Markku & Mönkkönen, Mikko & Reunanen, Pasi & Tikkanen, Olli-Pekka & Kouki, Jari, 2014. "Optimal contract length for biodiversity conservation under conservation budget constraint," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 14-24.
    3. Carlo Orecchia & Maria Elisabetta Tessitore, 2011. "Economic Growth and the Environment with Clean and Dirty Consumption," Working Papers 2011.57, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Susanne Soretz, 2003. "Stochastic Pollution and Environmental Care in an Endogenous Growth Model," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 71(4), pages 448-469, July.
    5. Alassane Drabo, 2010. "Environment Quality and Economic Convergence: Extending Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 30(2), pages 1617-1632.
    6. Naveen Adusumilli & Rowell Dikitanan & Hua Wang, 2019. "Effect of Cost-Sharing Federal Programs on Adoption of Water Conservation Practices: Results from Propensity Score Matching Approach," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(01), pages 1-16, July.
    7. Sharma, Bijay P. & Khanna, Madhu & Miao, Ruiqing, 2022. "Designing Efficient Payments to Incentivize GHG Mitigation Using Energy Crops," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322361, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. van Marrewijk, Charles & van der Ploeg, Federick & Verbeek, Jos, 1993. "Is growth bad for the environment? Pollution, abatement, and endogenous growth," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1151, The World Bank.
    9. Begoña Casino, 1999. "- Kuznets Curve And Transboundary Pollution," Working Papers. Serie EC 1999-20, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    10. Pates, Nicholas J. & Hendricks, Nathan P., 2016. "Additionality in Payments for Environmental Service Contracts with Technology Diffusion," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236066, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Alberto Ansuategi & Charles Perrings, 2000. "Transboundary Externalities in the Environmental Transition Hypothesis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 17(4), pages 353-373, December.
    12. Di Vita, Giuseppe, 2008. "Capital accumulation, interest rate, and the income-pollution pattern. A simple model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 225-235, March.
    13. Stephenson, Kurt & Shabman, Leonard, 2015. "Nutrient Assimilation Services for Water Quality Credit Trading Programs," RFF Working Paper Series dp-15-33, Resources for the Future.
    14. Lucas Bretschger & Alexandra Vinogradova, 2015. "Equitable and effective climate policy: Integrating less developed countries into a global climate agreement," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 437-467, October.
    15. Robinson, James A. & Srinivasan, T.N., 1993. "Long-term consequences of population growth: Technological change, natural resources, and the environment," Handbook of Population and Family Economics, in: M. R. Rosenzweig & Stark, O. (ed.), Handbook of Population and Family Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 21, pages 1175-1298, Elsevier.
    16. George Adu, 2013. "Effects on growth of environmental policy in a small open economy," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 15(4), pages 343-365, October.
    17. Theodore Panayotou, 2000. "Economic Growth and the Environment," CID Working Papers 56A, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    18. Timothy Capon & Michael Harris & Andrew Reeson, 2013. "The Design of Markets for Soil Carbon Sequestration," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 32(2), pages 161-173, June.
    19. Juutinen, Artti & Reunanen, Pasi & Mönkkönen, Mikko & Tikkanen, Olli-Pekka & Kouki, Jari, 2012. "Conservation of forest biodiversity using temporal conservation contracts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 121-129.
    20. Alassane DRABO, 2010. "Interrelationships between Health, Environment Quality and Economic Activity: What Consequences for Economic Convergence," Working Papers 201005, CERDI.

    More about this item

    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:bla:canjag:v:67:y:2019:i:1:p:15-30. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caefmea.html .

    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.