IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jagaec/v38y2006i01p17-32_02.html

Cost-Effectiveness of Nutrient Management and Buffers: Comparisons of Two Spatial Scenarios

Author

Listed:
  • Bonham, John G.
  • Bosch, Darrell J.
  • Pease, James W.

Abstract

Farmers and taxpayers would benefit from more cost-effective agricultural nutrient pollution control measures. The objectives of our study are (1) to assess compliance costs and reductions in phosphorus loadings from implementation of nutrient management and riparian buffers; and (2) to estimate how the spatial scenario, which is the method of representing farms within the watershed, affects estimated compliance costs and reductions in phosphorus deliveries. Estimated compliance costs are quite sensitive to the spatial scenario. Buffers are more cost-effective than nutrient management under one of the two spatial scenarios, whereas nutrient management is more cost-effective under the other scenario. Shifts to more erosive crops reduce the effectiveness of both pollution control measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Bonham, John G. & Bosch, Darrell J. & Pease, James W., 2006. "Cost-Effectiveness of Nutrient Management and Buffers: Comparisons of Two Spatial Scenarios," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(1), pages 17-32, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:38:y:2006:i:01:p:17-32_02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1074070800022045/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. Brouwer, Roy & Hofkes, Marjan & Linderhof, Vincent, 2008. "General equilibrium modelling of the direct and indirect economic impacts of water quality improvements in the Netherlands at national and river basin scale," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 127-140, May.
    2. Bernard, John C. & Pesek, John D. Jr. & Parish, Amy, 2015. "Potential Farmer Adoption of High Available Phosphorus Corn over a Three-year Period," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 44(3), pages 1-19, December.
    3. George HALKOS & Georgia GALANI, 2014. "Cost Effectiveness Analysis in Reducing Nutrient Loading in Baltic and Black Seas A Review," Journal of Advanced Research in Management, ASERS Publishing, vol. 5(1), pages 28-51.
    4. Amon-Armah, Frederick & Yiridoe, Emmanuel K. & Hebb, Dale & Jamieson, Rob, "undated". "Nitrogen abatement cost comparison for cropping systems under alternative management choices," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149915, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. 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.
    6. Santosh R. Ghimire & Adam C. Nayak & Joel Corona & Rajbir Parmar & Raghavan Srinivasan & Katie Mendoza & John M. Johnston, 2022. "Holistic Sustainability Assessment of Riparian Buffer Designs: Evaluation of Alternative Buffer Policy Scenarios Integrating Stream Water Quality and Costs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-33, September.
    7. Goeringer, L. Paul & Goodwin, Harold L., Jr. & Dixon, Bruce L. & Popp, Michael P., 2013. "EnVesting in an Agricultural Legacy: Design and Implementation of a Targeted Young and Beginning Farmer Loan Program in Arkansas," 2013 Annual Meeting, February 2-5, 2013, Orlando, Florida 143037, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    8. Stephenson, Kurt & Shabman, Leonard A., "undated". "The Use of Nutrient Assimilation Services in Performance-based Water Quality Incentive Programs," 2013 Annual Meeting, February 2-5, 2013, Orlando, Florida 143093, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    9. repec:ags:afjare:225655 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects

    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:cup:jagaec:v:38:y:2006:i:01:p:17-32_02. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aae .

    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.