IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea09/49158.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Production Incentives from Static Decoupling: Entry, Exit and Use Exclusion Restrictions

Author

Listed:
  • Just, David R.
  • Kropp, Jaclyn D.

Abstract

The use of agricultural decoupled support has increased as World Trade Organization (WTO) member nations implement less trade distortive policies. However, the true production effects of these policies are still unclear. We show how the exclusion restrictions of U.S. direct payments, namely, the fruit and vegetable restriction and the requirement of keeping land in good agricultural use, cause the decoupled payment to become fully coupled over time as relative profits adjust. Theoretically, decoupled payments can be more trade distorting than an equivalent (same level of taxpayer expenditure) fully coupled subsidy.

Suggested Citation

  • Just, David R. & Kropp, Jaclyn D., 2009. "Production Incentives from Static Decoupling: Entry, Exit and Use Exclusion Restrictions," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49158, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea09:49158
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/49158
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rucker, Randal R & Thurman, Walter N & Sumner, Daniel A, 1995. "Restricting the Market for Quota: An Analysis of Tobacco Production Rights with Corroboration from Congressional Testimony," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(1), pages 142-175, February.
    2. David A. Hennessy, 1998. "The Production Effects of Agricultural Income Support Policies under Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 46-57.
    3. Harry de Gorter & David R. Just & Jaclyn D. Kropp, 2008. "Cross-subsidization Due to Inframarginal Support in Agriculture: A General Theory and Empirical Evidence," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(1), pages 42-54.
    4. Barry K. Goodwin & Ashok K. Mishra, 2006. "Are “Decoupled” Farm Program Payments Really Decoupled? An Empirical Evaluation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(1), pages 73-89.
    5. Nancy H. Chau & Harry de Gorter, 2005. "Disentangling the Consequences of Direct Payment Schemes in Agriculture on Fixed Costs, Exit Decisions, and Output," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1174-1181.
    6. Daniel A. Sumner & Christopher A. Wolf, 1996. "Quotas without Supply Control: Effects of Dairy Quota Policy in California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(2), pages 354-366.
    7. Arathi Bhaskar & John C. Beghin, 2010. "Decoupled Farm Payments and the Role of Base Acreage and Yield Updating Under Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(3), pages 849-858.
    8. Barrett E. Kirwan, 2009. "The Incidence of U.S. Agricultural Subsidies on Farmland Rental Rates," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(1), pages 138-164, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    decoupled payments; infra-marginal support; cross-subsidization; Agricultural and Food Policy; International Relations/Trade; Land Economics/Use; Q15; Q17; Q18;

    JEL classification:

    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aaea09:49158. 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.