IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea90/270889.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Environmental And Farm Commodity Policy Linkages In The Us And Ec

Author

Listed:
  • Abler, David g.
  • Shortle, James S.

Abstract

This paper analyzes restrictions on agricultural chemicals in the US and EC under various farm commodity policy scenarios using a partial equilibrium simulation model. The model has three regions (US, EC, rest of the world) and four commodities (wheat, corn, coarse grain, soybeans). Medium- and long-run impacts are derived. Given existing farm programs, US landowners gain from chemical restrictions while EC ·1andowners generally lose. Given bilateral elimination of farm programs, both US and EC landowners gain from chemical restrictions. Bilateral farm program elimination without chemical restrictions induces a shift in chemical usage from the EC to the US.

Suggested Citation

  • Abler, David g. & Shortle, James S., 1990. "Environmental And Farm Commodity Policy Linkages In The Us And Ec," 1990 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Vancouver, Canada 270889, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea90:270889
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.270889
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/270889/files/aaea-1990-058.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/270889/files/aaea-1990-058.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.270889?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roningen, Vernon O. & Dixit, Praveen M., 1989. "Economic Implications Of Agricultural Policy Reforms In Industrial Market Economies," Staff Reports 278843, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Kaneda, Hiromitzu, 1982. "Specification of production functions for analyzing technical change and factor inputs in agricultural development," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 97-108, August.
    3. Kislev, Yoav & Peterson, Willis, 1982. "Prices, Technology, and Farm Size," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(3), pages 578-595, June.
    4. Robert G. Chambers & Utpal Vasavada, 1983. "Testing Asset Fixity for U.S. Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 65(4), pages 761-769.
    5. Thomas W. Hertel, 1989. "Negotiating Reductions in Agricultural Support: Implications of Technology and Factor Mobility," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 71(3), pages 559-573.
    6. Bonnieux, Francois, 1989. "Estimating Regional-Level Input Demand for French Agriculture Using a Translog Production Function," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 16(2), pages 229-241.
    7. Hans P. Binswanger, 1974. "A Cost Function Approach to the Measurement of Elasticities of Factor Demand and Elasticities of Substitution," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 56(2), pages 377-386.
    8. Sullivan, John & Wainio, John & Roningen, Vernon, 1989. "A Database For Trade Liberalization Studies," Staff Reports 278178, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    9. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521311120.
    10. Bohm, Peter & Russell, Clifford S., 1985. "Comparative analysis of alternative policy instruments," Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, in: A. V. Kneese† & J. L. Sweeney (ed.), Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 395-460, Elsevier.
    11. Bonnieux, F & Rainelli, P, 1988. "Agricultural Policy and Environment in Developed Countries," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 15(2/3), pages 263-281.
    12. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249.
    13. Francois Bonnieux, 1989. "Estimating regional-level input demand for french agriculture using a Translog production function," Post-Print hal-01595670, HAL.
    14. Subhash C. Ray, 1982. "A Translog Cost Function Analysis of U.S. Agriculture, 1939–77," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(3), pages 490-498.
    15. Francois Bonnieux & Pierre Rainelli, 1988. "Agricultural policy and environment in developed countries [Politique agricole et environnement dans les pays industrialisés]," Post-Print hal-02724957, HAL.
    16. K. Sato, 1967. "A Two-Level Constant-Elasticity-of-Substitution Production Function," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 34(2), pages 201-218.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abler, David G. & Shortle, James S., 1991. "Innovation And Environmental Quality," 1991 Annual Meeting, August 4-7, Manhattan, Kansas 271266, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Tobey, James A. & Reinert, Kenneth A., 1991. "The Effects of Domestic Agricultural Policy Reform on Environmental Quality," Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 43(2), pages 1-9.
    3. 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).
    4. Don Fullerton, 1996. "Why Have Separate Environmental Taxes?," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 10, pages 33-70, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Anna Alberini & Kathleen Segerson, 2002. "Assessing Voluntary Programs to Improve Environmental Quality," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 157-184, June.
    6. Rauscher, Michael, 2001. "International trade, foreign investment, and the environment," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 29, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    7. Friedrich Schneider & Klaus Salhofer & Erwin Schmid & Gerhard Streicher, 2001. "Was the Austrian agricultural policy least cost efficient?," Economics working papers 2001-03, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    8. Kamminga, C. & van der Straaten, J., 1996. "On the economic significance of an energy/CO2 tax for the Netherlands," WORC Paper 96.10.016/2, Tilburg University, Work and Organization Research Centre.
    9. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    10. Horan, Richard D. & Claassen, Roger & Cooper, Joseph C., 2000. "Environmental Risk And Agri-Environmental Policy Design," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21827, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Lehmann, Paul, 2008. "Using a policy mix for pollution control: A review of economic literature," UFZ Discussion Papers 4/2008, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    12. Sterner, Thomas & Hoglund, Lena, 2000. "Output-Based Refunding of Emission Payments: Theory, Distribution of Costs, and International Experience," Discussion Papers 10670, Resources for the Future.
    13. Economides, George & Miaouli, Natasha, 2006. "Federal transfers, environmental policy and economic growth," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 680-699, December.
    14. Max Keilbach, 1995. "Estimation of the value of the marginal product of emission in a country where emissions output is regulated — an empirical study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(3), pages 305-319, April.
    15. C. Rendleman & Kenneth Reinert & James Tobey, 1995. "Market-based systems for reducing chemical use in agriculture in the United States," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(1), pages 51-70, January.
    16. Msangi, Siwa & Rosegrant, Mark, 2007. "A Closer Look at the IMPACT of Climate Change on Country-Level Food Security and Nutrition," Conference papers 331635, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    17. Sterner, Thomas & Hoglund Isaksson, Lena, 2006. "Refunded emission payments theory, distribution of costs, and Swedish experience of NOx abatement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 93-106, April.
    18. Pandey, Rita & Bhardwaj, Geetesh, 2000. "Tradable permits for environmental protection: Case study of an integrated steel plant in India," Working Papers 00/2, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    19. Labandeira-Villot, Xavier, 1996. "Market instruments and the control of acid rain damage : Effects of a sulphur tax on the Spanish electricity generating industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(9), pages 841-854, September.
    20. Roger Claassen & Richard Horan, 2001. "Uniform and Non-Uniform Second-Best Input Taxes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(1), pages 1-22, May.

    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:aaea90:270889. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (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.