IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/presci/v93y2014ips167-s178.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Slippage effects of land-based policies: Evaluating the Conservation Reserve Program using satellite imagery

Author

Listed:
  • David A. Fleming

Abstract

type="main" xml:lang="es"> El Programa de Reservas para la Conservación (CRP, por sus siglas en inglés) es la principal política agrícola terrestre de los Estados Unidos. Varios estudios económicos han analizado este programa; sin embargo, sólo unos pocos han considerado sus implicaciones para las tierras no suscritas, es decir, sus efectos regionales sobre las decisiones de uso de del suelo. Este artículo examina el efecto indirecto de la CRP en la conversión de tierras no agrícolas para la agricultura; un fenómeno conocido como «canje» a tierras de labor. Partiendo de estudios anteriores, se establece empíricamente un modelo de «canje» a tierras de labor a nivel de condado que utiliza imágenes de satélite que permiten la observación de cambios específicos en la cubierta del suelo (p. ej. del bosque a la agricultura). Los resultados sugieren la existencia de este «canje» a tierras de labor debido a la CRP, pero bajo tasas variables dependiendo de la cubierta inicial del suelo.

Suggested Citation

  • David A. Fleming, 2014. "Slippage effects of land-based policies: Evaluating the Conservation Reserve Program using satellite imagery," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 93, pages 167-178, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:presci:v:93:y:2014:i::p:s167-s178
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/pirs.12049
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. JunJie Wu, 2005. "Slippage Effects of the Conservation Reserve Program: Reply," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(1), pages 251-254.
    2. Wu, JunJie & Zilberman, David & Babcock, Bruce A., 2001. "Environmental and Distributional Impacts of Conservation Targeting Strategies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 333-350, May.
    3. Young, C. Edwin & Osborn, C. Tim, 1990. "The Conservation Reserve Program: An Economic Assessment," Agricultural Economic Reports 308084, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    4. Gorddard, Russell J. & Whitten, Stuart M. & Reeson, Andrew, 2008. "When should biodiversity tenders contract on outcomes?," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 5979, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    5. Hild Rygnestad & Rob Fraser, 1996. "Land Heterogeneity And The Effectiveness Of Cap Set‐Aside," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1‐4), pages 255-260, January.
    6. JunJie Wu, 2000. "Slippage Effects of the Conservation Reserve Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 979-992.
    7. JunJie Wu & Haixia Lin, 2010. "The Effect of the Conservation Reserve Program on Land Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(1), pages 1-21.
    8. Dana L. Hoag & William E. Foster & Bruce A. Babcock, 1993. "Field-Level Measurement of Land Productivity and Program Slippage," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(1), pages 181-189.
    9. Ruben N. Lubowski & Andrew J. Plantinga & Robert N. Stavins, 2008. "What Drives Land-Use Change in the United States? A National Analysis of Landowner Decisions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(4), pages 529-550.
    10. Michael J. Roberts & Ruben N. Lubowski, 2007. "Enduring Impacts of Land Retirement Policies: Evidence from the Conservation Reserve Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(4), pages 516-538.
    11. Capozza, Dennis R. & Helsley, Robert W., 1990. "The stochastic city," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 187-203, September.
    12. Sullivan, Patrick & Hellerstein, Daniel & Hansen, LeRoy T. & Johansson, Robert C. & Koenig, Steven R. & Lubowski, Ruben N. & McBride, William D. & McGranahan, David A. & Roberts, Michael J. & Vogel, S, 2004. "The Conservation Reserve Program: Economic Implications for Rural America," Agricultural Economic Reports 33987, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    13. Michael J. Roberts & Shawn Bucholtz, 2005. "Slippage in the Conservation Reserve Program or Spurious Correlation? A Comment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(1), pages 244-250.
    14. Michael J. Roberts & Shawn Bucholz, 2006. "Slippage in the Conservation Reserve Program or Spurious Correlation? A Rejoinder," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(2), pages 512-514.
    15. Iain Fraser & Robert Waschik, 2005. "Agricultural Land Retirement and Slippage: Lessons from an Australian Case Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(2).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Georgina Belem Carrasco Galvan & Jacqueline M. Vadjunec & Todd D. Fagin, 2024. "Lessons from the Archives: Understanding Historical Agricultural Change in the Southern Great Plains," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-31, February.
    2. Samiul Haque, 2022. "US federal farm payments and farm size: Quantile estimation on panel data," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 139-154, February.

    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. Jennifer M. Alix-Garcia & Elizabeth N. Shapiro & Katharine R. E. Sims, 2012. "Forest Conservation and Slippage: Evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 613-638.
    2. Mykel R. Taylor & Nathan P. Hendricks & Gabriel S. Sampson & Dillon Garr, 2021. "The Opportunity Cost of the Conservation Reserve Program: A Kansas Land Example," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(2), pages 849-865, June.
    3. Kim, Man-Keun & Peralta, Denis & McCarl, Bruce A., 2014. "Land-based greenhouse gas emission offset and leakage discounting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 265-273.
    4. Jones, Carol Adaire & Nickerson, Cynthia J. & Heisey, Paul W., 2012. "New Uses of Old Tools: An Assessment of Current and Potential Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Mitigation with Sector-based Policies," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124735, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. 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.
    6. Jones, Carol & Nickerson, Cynthia J. & Sperow, Mark, 2013. "Greenhouse Gas Mitigation from the Conservation Reserve Program: The Contribution of Post-Contract Land Use Change," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150501, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Alix-Garcia, Jennifer & Wolff, Hendrik, 2014. "Payment for Ecosystem Services from Forests," IZA Discussion Papers 8179, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Ekaterina Vorotnikova & Serhat Asci & James L. Seale, 2018. "Joint production, land allocation, and the effects of the production flexibility program," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 1121-1143, November.
    9. 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).
    10. B Kelsey Jack & Carolyn Kousky & Katharine R E Sims, 2007. "Lessons Relearned: Can Previous Research on Incentive-Based Mechanisms Point the Way for Payments for Ecosystem Services?," CID Working Papers 15, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    11. Andrew Manale & Cynthia Morgan & Glenn Sheriff & David Simpson, 2011. "Offset markets for nutrient and sediment discharges in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed: Policy tradeoffs and potential steps forward," NCEE Working Paper Series 201105, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Aug 2011.
    12. Filewod, Ben & McCarney, Geoff, 2023. "Avoiding leakage from nature-based offsets by design," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117927, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Claassen, Roger & Cattaneo, Andrea & Johansson, Robert, 2008. "Cost-effective design of agri-environmental payment programs: U.S. experience in theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 737-752, May.
    14. Filewod, Ben & McCarney, Geoff, 2023. "Avoiding leakage from nature-based offsets by design," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117928, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Zilberman, David & Segerson, Kathleen, 2012. "Top Ten Design Elements to Achieve More Efficient Conservation Programs," C-FARE Reports 156623, Council on Food, Agricultural, and Resource Economics (C-FARE).
    16. Delacote, Philippe & Robinson, Elizabeth J.Z. & Roussel, Sébastien, 2016. "Deforestation, leakage and avoided deforestation policies: A spatial analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 192-210.
    17. Thomas, Alban & Chakir, Raja, 2020. "Unintended consequences of environmental policies: the case of set-aside and agricultural intensification," TSE Working Papers 20-1066, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    18. Wallander, Steven & Aillery, Marcel & Hellerstein, Daniel & Hand, Michael S., 2013. "The Role of Conservation Programs in Drought Risk Adaptation," Economic Research Report 262224, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    19. Jacobson, Sarah, 2014. "Temporal spillovers in land conservation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 366-379.
    20. FRASER Iain & WASCHIK Robert, 2010. "Agricultural Land Retirement for Biodiversity: The Australian Wool Industry," EcoMod2003 330700055, EcoMod.

    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:presci:v:93:y:2014:i::p:s167-s178. 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: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1056-8190 .

    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.