IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea06/21346.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic Impacts of the Conservation Reserve Program: A General Equilibrium Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Taheripour, Farzad

Abstract

This article uses a general equilibrium framework and econometric analyses to examine economic wide impacts of the Conservation Reserves Program. It determines direct and indirect factors which affect the economic efficiency of the program and shows their magnitudes. It shows that the interaction between the program and the tax system causes indirect efficiency costs but the interaction between the program and the agricultural support subsidies generate economic gains. The program has the potential to distort the labor market and cause efficiency losses form this channel. However the analytical model shows that trade can reduce social costs of the policy because a part of the burden of the policy can be passed on to foreign consumers of crop products through the world market. The numerical results show that at the current level of acreage reduction (34 millions acres), the marginal cost of spending one more dollar on the program is about $1.9 for the US economy. In addition, the numerical results illustrate that the program has the potential to generate different and significant unintended economic impacts. For example, depending on the parameters of the model, the program can raise the prices of land up to 10.6%, generate up to 20% land conversion, and raise the demand for nitrogen fertilizer up to 4.2% at the current level of acreage reduction. Finally, the empirical regression results demonstrate that the program has affected the production behavior of the crop industry significantly. In particular, the program has increased the demand for fertilizer and labor and has decreased the demand for land and capital.

Suggested Citation

  • Taheripour, Farzad, 2006. "Economic Impacts of the Conservation Reserve Program: A General Equilibrium Framework," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21346, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea06:21346
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/21346
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas W. Hertel & Kyle Stiegert & Harry Vroomen, 1996. "Nitrogen-Land Substitution in Corn Production: A Reconciliation of Aggregate and Firm-Level Evidence," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(1), pages 30-40.
    2. Binswanger, Hans P, 1974. "The Measurement of Technical Change Biases with Many Factors of Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 64(6), pages 964-976, December.
    3. Ruben N. Lubowski & Michael J. Roberts, 2005. "How Cost-Effective Are Land Retirement Auctions? Estimating the Difference between Payments and Willingness to Accept in the Conservation Reserve Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1239-1247.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Sumner, Daniel A., 2003. "Implications of the US Farm Bill of 2002 for agricultural trade and trade negotiations," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(1), March.
    7. Kawagoe, Toshihiko & Otsuka, Keijiro & Hayami, Yujiro, 1986. "Induced Bias of Technical Change in Agriculture: The United States and Japan, 1880-1980," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 523-544, June.
    8. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Parry, Ian W. H. & Williams III, Roberton C. & Burtraw, Dallas, 1999. "The cost-effectiveness of alternative instruments for environmental protection in a second-best setting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 329-360, June.
    9. Taheripour, Farzad & Khanna, Madhu & Nelson, Charles, 2005. "Welfare Impacts of Alternative Public Policies for Environmental Protection in Agriculture in an Open Economy: A General Equilibrium Framework," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19317, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Abler, David G & Shortle, James S, 1992. "Environmental and Farm Commodity Policy Linkages in the U.S. and the EC," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 19(2), pages 197-217.
    11. 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.
    12. Feng, Hongli & Kling, Catherine L. & Kurkalova, Lyubov A. & Secchi, Silvia & Gassman, Philip W., 2005. "Conservation Reserve Program in the Presence of a Working Land Alternative: Implications for Environmental Quality, Program Participation, and Income Transfer, The," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12411, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    13. Christensen, Laurits R & Greene, William H, 1976. "Economies of Scale in U.S. Electric Power Generation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(4), pages 655-676, August.
    14. Hongli Feng & Catherine L. Kling & Lyubov A. Kurkalova & Silvia Secchi & Philip W. Gassman, 2005. "The Conservation Reserve Program in the Presence of a Working Land Alternative: Implications for Environmental Quality, Program Participation, and Income Transfer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1231-1238.
    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. repec:eee:ecoser:v:18:y:2016:i:c:p:175-185 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:ags:aaea06:21346. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.