Environmental and economic impacts of reducing total phosphorous runoff in an agricultural watershed
The economy of northwest Arkansas relies greatly upon livestock and poultry production. The supply of production by-products is increasingly coming under scrutiny as an important source of water pollution in the region. This study uses stochastic dominance techniques to evaluate, environmentally and economically, a range of ten best management practice scenarios to lessen water pollution in the Lincoln Lake watershed. The goal is to generate rankings that could be useful for supporting producers' and watershed managers' selection of management practices to reduce total phosphorous losses in runoff. Specifically, this study compares scenarios in terms of net return risk reduction for bermudagrass hay producers. The results showed that environmental and economic rankings differ from each other. Although all scenarios analyzed were effective in reducing total phosphorous losses when compared to a baseline, six of them also decreased net returns. This suggests that including some best management practices may lead to increased net return risk. However, some scenarios were identified that may increase net returns, reduce total phosphorous losses and do not differ considerably from producers' current management practices. The previous results suggested that the joint environmental-economic impact was important when considering scenarios and that producers' risk attitudes and best management practices' economic impacts should be accounted for when selecting scenarios. Producers and watershed managers can weigh trade-offs between total phosphorous losses reduction and net returns variability when making water conservation decisions.
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.
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.:
- Grove, Bennie & Nel, F. & Maluleke, H.H., 2006. "Stochastic efficiency analysis of alternative water conservation strategies," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 45(1), March.
- Meyer, Jack, 1977. "Second Degree Stochastic Dominance with Respect to a Function," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 18(2), pages 477-87, June.
- J. Brian Hardaker & James W. Richardson & Gudbrand Lien & Keith D. Schumann, 2004.
"Stochastic efficiency analysis with risk aversion bounds: a simplified approach,"
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics,
Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(2), pages 253-270, 06.
- Hardaker, J. Brian & Richardson, James W. & Lien, Gudbrand D. & Schumann, Keith D., 2004. "Stochastic efficiency analysis with risk aversion bounds: a simplified approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(2), June.
- McCarl, Bruce A., 1990. "Generalized Stochastic Dominance: An Empirical Examination," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(02), December.
- Meyer, Jack & Richardson, James W. & Schumann, Keith D., 2009.
"Stochastic efficiency analysis with risk aversion bounds: a correction,"
Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics,
Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(4), December.
- Jack Meyer & James W. Richardson & Keith D. Schumann, 2009. "Stochastic efficiency analysis with risk aversion bounds: a correction," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(4), pages 521-525, October.
- Popp, Jennie S. Hughes & Rodriguez, German, 2007. "The Role of Stakeholders' Perceptions in Addressing Water Quality Disputes in an Embattled Watershed," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34808, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
- Philip W. Gassman & Manuel R. Reyes & Colleen H. Green & Jeffrey G. Arnold, 2007. "Soil and Water Assessment Tool: Historical Development, Applications, and Future Research Directions, The," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 07-wp443, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:104:y:2011:i:8:p:623-633. 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: (Zhang, Lei)
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.