IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/revage/v12y1990i1p89-97..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using the Conservation Reserve to Reduce Program Crop Plantings

Author

Listed:
  • Steven J. Taff

Abstract

This paper examines the policy instrument by which a land retirement program designed primarily for conservation purposes attempts to reduce surplus commodity production as well. A simple model incorporating the cropland allocation effects of entry into the federal Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) is developed to estimate the reduction in aggregate crop acreage brought about under two program alternatives: (1) the "base bite," which requires a reduction in a farm's commodity base as a condition of CRP entry (the current law) and (2) no base bite, which for planting reduction purposes would rely upon a "displacement" of acreage actually available for planting. Data from the first eight rounds of CRP bidding (through February 1989) show that the base bite reduces CRP entrants' aggregate annual program crop plantings by 14.9 million acres under 1987 program rules, while displacement would have reduced plantings by 13.1 million acres. Under "1990 rules" (no set-aside required for participation), the base bite provision would reduce plantings by 19.6 million acres. Displacement is unaffected by set-aside levels. If the base bite were removed, the concomitant lower opportunity costs of entry would result in either an increase in CRP acreage or a decrease in budget outlays, depending upon program administration.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven J. Taff, 1990. "Using the Conservation Reserve to Reduce Program Crop Plantings," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 12(1), pages 89-97.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:revage:v:12:y:1990:i:1:p:89-97.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/aepp/12.1.89
    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.

    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:oup:revage:v:12:y:1990:i:1:p:89-97.. 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: Oxford University Press or Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.