IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ecopol/v13y2001i3p257-279.html

Campaign Contributions and Agricultural Subsidies

Author

Listed:
  • Rigoberto A. Lopez

Abstract

This article examines the influence of campaign contributions on agricultural subsidies. Empirical results revealed that rent‐seeking works, i.e. contributions, influence agricultural subsidies in the manner they best serve contributors' economic interests. Eliminating campaign contributions would significantly decrease agricultural subsidies, hurt farm groups, benefit consumers and taxpayers, and increase social welfare by approximately $5.5 billion. Although contributions are not the only determinants of agricultural subsidies, investment returns to farm PAC contributors are quite high ($1 in contributions brings about $2,000 in policy transfers). In fact, the results are in sharp contrast to the “truthful contributions” assumption of the Grossman–Helpman model.

Suggested Citation

  • Rigoberto A. Lopez, 2001. "Campaign Contributions and Agricultural Subsidies," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 257-279, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ecopol:v:13:y:2001:i:3:p:257-279
    DOI: 10.1111/1468-0343.00093
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0343.00093
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1468-0343.00093?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rigoberto A. Lopez & Xenia Matschke, 2006. "Food Protection for Sale," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(3), pages 380-391, August.
    2. Per G. Fredriksson & Khawaja A. Mamun, 2014. "Tobacco Politics and Electoral Accountability in the United States," Public Finance Review, , vol. 42(1), pages 4-34, January.
    3. Rigoberto A. Lopez, 2008. "Does ‘Protection for Sale’ Apply to the US Food Industries?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 25-40, February.
    4. Rigoberto A. Lopez & Ibrahima Hathie, 2002. "Is Protection for Sale in U.S. Food Industries?," Food Marketing Policy Center Research Reports 069, University of Connecticut, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Charles J. Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy.
    5. Ștefan-Mihai PETREA & Dragos Sebastian Cristea & Maria Magdalena Turek Rahoveanu & Cristina Gabriela Zamfir & Adrian Turek Rahoveanu & Gheorghe Adrian Zugravu & Dumitru Nancu, 2020. "Perspectives of the Moldavian Agricultural Sector by Using a Custom-Developed Analytical Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-40, June.
    6. Gawande, Kishore & Hoekman, Bernard, 2006. "Lobbying and Agricultural Trade Policy in the United States," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(3), pages 527-561, July.
    7. Bellemare, Marc F. & Carnes, Nicholas, 2015. "Why do members of congress support agricultural protection?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 20-34.
    8. Frýd, Lukáš & Sokol, Ondřej, 2021. "Relationships between technical efficiency and subsidies for Czech farms: A two-stage robust approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    9. Lopez, Rigoberto A. & He, Xi & De Falcis, Eleonora, 2017. "What Drives China’s New Agricultural Subsidies?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 279-292.
    10. Wagner, Gary A. & Elder, Erick M., 2021. "Campaigning for retirement: State teacher union campaign contributions and pension generosity," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    11. Christian Cox, 2020. "Campaign Contributions by Non‐profit Executives and Government Grants," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 82(4), pages 916-933, August.
    12. Allcott, Hunt & Lederman, Daniel & Lopez, Ramon, 2006. "Political institutions, inequality, and agricultural growth : the public expenditure connection," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3902, The World Bank.

    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:ecopol:v:13:y:2001:i:3:p:257-279. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0954-1985 .

    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.