IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/nddaae/44823.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Nature of Dynamic Relationships Between Farm Real Estate Values and Federal Farm Program Payments

Author

Listed:
  • Shaik, Saleem
  • Miljkovic, Dragan

Abstract

The objective of this study is to test the dynamic relationships among variables including farm real estate values, farm returns, farm program payments, and real interest rates in an income capitalization model. Our analysis is unique in multiple ways: (1) it covers the period beginning with the introduction of the first farm bill in 1933 through 2006; (2) assumes endogeneity of the variables, and (3) develops a dynamic modeling framework. Endogeneity is assumed among farm real estate values, farm program payments, and farm receipts since the direction of causality is unclear from a theoretical standpoint. Results indicate that policy makers are reactive rather than pro-active in making transfers to farmers. Once farm program payments are implemented, payments have positive impacts only in the short run on the value of farm real estate. However, considering endogeneity, the model suggests that it is possible that farm program payments have a lasting positive indirect impact (via farm returns) on the value of farm real estate.

Suggested Citation

  • Shaik, Saleem & Miljkovic, Dragan, 2008. "Nature of Dynamic Relationships Between Farm Real Estate Values and Federal Farm Program Payments," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 44823, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:nddaae:44823
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/44823
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hakkio, Craig S. & Rush, Mark, 1991. "Cointegration: how short is the long run?," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, pages 571-581.
    2. Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2004. "Trade, Growth, and the Environment," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(1), pages 7-71, March.
    3. Sims, Christopher A, 1980. "Macroeconomics and Reality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-48, January.
    4. Bénédicte Vidaillet & V. D'Estaintot & P. Abécassis, 2005. "Introduction," Post-Print hal-00287137, HAL.
    5. Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 2005. "Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(1), pages 85-91, February.
    6. Lucas, Robert E.B. & Wheeler, David & Hettige, Hemamala, 1992. "Economic development, environmental regulation, and the international migration of toxic industrial pollution : 1960-88," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1062, The World Bank.
    7. Coondoo, Dipankor & Dinda, Soumyananda, 2002. "Causality between income and emission: a country group-specific econometric analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 351-367, March.
    8. Copeland, Brian R., 2005. "Policy Endogeneity and the Effects of Trade on the Environment," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 34(1), April.
    9. Perron, Pierre & Rodriguez, Gabriel, 2003. "GLS detrending, efficient unit root tests and structural change," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, pages 1-27.
    10. Roger Perman & David I. Stern, 2003. "Evidence from panel unit root and cointegration tests that the Environmental Kuznets Curve does not exist," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(3), pages 325-347, September.
    11. Søren Johansen & Rocco Mosconi & Bent Nielsen, 2000. "Cointegration analysis in the presence of structural breaks in the deterministic trend," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 3(2), pages 216-249.
    12. Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 1994. "North-South Trade and the Environment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 109(3), pages 755-787.
    13. Dinda, Soumyananda, 2004. "Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 431-455, August.
    14. Dinda, Soumyananda & Coondoo, Dipankor, 2006. "Income and emission: A panel data-based cointegration analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 167-181, May.
    15. Gonzalo, Jesus, 1994. "Five alternative methods of estimating long-run equilibrium relationships," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1-2), pages 203-233.
    16. Gene M. Grossman & Alan B. Krueger, 1991. "Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement," NBER Working Papers 3914, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Johansen, Soren, 1988. "Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 12(2-3), pages 231-254.
    18. Johansen, Søren & Juselius, Katarina, 1992. "Testing structural hypotheses in a multivariate cointegration analysis of the PPP and the UIP for UK," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1-3), pages 211-244.
    19. Michael E. Porter & Claas van der Linde, 1995. "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 97-118, Fall.
    20. Edward E. Leamer, 1988. "Measures of Openness," NBER Chapters,in: Trade Policy Issues and Empirical Analysis, pages 145-204 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Flores, Nicholas E. & Carson, Richard T., 1997. "The Relationship between the Income Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 287-295, July.
    22. Johansen, Soren, 1995. "Likelihood-Based Inference in Cointegrated Vector Autoregressive Models," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198774501.
    23. Chintrakarn, Pandej & Millimet, Daniel L., 2006. "The environmental consequences of trade: Evidence from subnational trade flows," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 430-453, July.
    24. Bengt Kristrom & Pere Riera, 1996. "Is the income elasticity of environmental improvements less than one?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 45-55, January.
    25. David I. Stern, 2005. "Reversal in the Trend of Global Anthropogenic Sulfur Emissions," Rensselaer Working Papers in Economics 0504, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Economics.
    26. Gale, Lewis R. & Mendez, Jose A., 1998. "The empirical relationship between trade, growth and the environment," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 53-61.
    27. Pritchett, Lant, 1991. "Measuring outward orientation in developing countries : can it be done?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 566, The World Bank.
    28. Judith M. Dean, 2002. "Does trade liberalization harm the environment? A new test," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 35(4), pages 819-842, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Dynamics; Farm programs payments; Farm real estate values; Vector error correction model; U.S. data; 1933-2006; Agricultural Finance; Farm Management; Q18; H50; C32;

    JEL classification:

    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy
    • H50 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - General
    • C32 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes; State Space Models

    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:nddaae:44823. 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/dandsus.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.

    We have no 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.

    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.