Environmental and Production Cost Impacts of No-till in Finland: Estimates from Observed Behavior
No-till has been promoted as a cultivation method that reduces both production costs and the environmental impacts of farming relative to conventional tillage. Using farm-level data from Finland, we show that no-till has no statistically significant effect on total variable costs but that it increases the use of plant protection products and fertilizers, and decreases the use of labor. An environmental impact simulation combining the results on input use with a nutrient and herbicide runoff model predicts that no-till produces environmental benefits on highly erodible land but may be even detrimental to the environment in average conditions.
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.:
- Lyubov Kurkalova & Catherine Kling & Jinhua Zhao, 2006.
"Green Subsidies in Agriculture: Estimating the Adoption Costs of Conservation Tillage from Observed Behavior,"
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie,
Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 54(2), pages 247-267, 06.
- Kling, Catherine L. & Kurkalova, Lyubov A. & Zhao, Jinhua, 2006. "Green Subsidies in Agriculture: Estimating the Adoption Costs of Conservation Tillage from Observed Behavior," Staff General Research Papers 12344, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Jussi Lankoski & Markku Ollikainen & Pekka Uusitalo, 2006. "No-till technology: benefits to farmers and the environment? Theoretical analysis and application to Finnish agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 33(2), pages 193-221, June.
- Caves, Douglas W & Christensen, Laurits R & Swanson, Joseph A, 1981. "Productivity Growth, Scale Economies, and Capacity Utilization in U.S. Railroads, 1955-74," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(5), pages 994-1002, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:87:y:2011:iii:1:p:508-527. 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: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.