IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Theoretical Examination of the Conditions of Best Management Practices Adoption and the Easing of Trade Distortion for Sugar

  • Lee, Young-Jae
Registered author(s):

    In this study it is examined to see that if the government subsidy compensating for the additional cost of adopting best management practices (BMP) is equal to marginal net benefit, will farmers then try to adopt BMP at every level of TRQ and FMA without exhibiting concerns over the form of their production function and, also, will this then imply an ability on the part of the government to lighten importing and market restrictions on sugar.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/6826
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Southern Agricultural Economics Association in its series 2008 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2008, Dallas, Texas with number 6826.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 2008
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:ags:saeaed:6826
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.saea.org/

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Amani Elobeid & John C. Beghin, 2005. "Multilateral Trade and Agricultural Policy Reforms in Sugar Markets," Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) Publications 04-wp356, Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) at Iowa State University.
    2. Houston, Jack E. & Sun, Henglun, 1999. "Cost-Share Incentives And Best Management Practices In A Pilot Water Quality Program," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(01), July.
    3. Caswell, Margriet & Fuglie, Keith O. & Ingram, Cassandra & Jans, Sharon & Kascak, Catherine, 2001. "Adoption of Agricultural Production Practices: Lessons Learned from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Area Studies Project," Agricultural Economics Reports 33985, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    4. Gregory Amacher & Peter Feather, 1997. "Testing producer perceptions of jointly beneficial best management practices for improved water quality," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 153-159.
    5. Bruce A. Babcock & John C. Beghin & Jacinto F. Fabiosa & Stephane De Cara & Amani Elobeid & Cheng Fang & Chad E. Hart & Murat Isik & Holger Matthey & Alexander E. Saak & Karen Kovarik & FAPRI Staff, 2002. "Doha Round of the World Trade Organization: Appraising Further Liberalization of Agricultural Markets, The," Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) Publications 02-wp317, Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) at Iowa State University.
    6. McCann, Laura M.J. & Easter, K. William, 1998. "Differences Between Farmer And Agency Attitudes Regarding Policies To Reduce Phosphorus Pollution In The Minnesota River Basin," Staff Papers 14268, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    7. Beghin, John C. & Dong, Fengxia & Elobeid, Amani E. & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Fuller, Frank H. & Hart, Chad E. & Kovacik, Karen & Matthey, Holger & Saak, Alexander E. & Tokgoz, Simla & Chavez, Eddie C. , 2004. "FAPRI 2004 U.S. and World Agricultural Outlook," Staff Reports 32046, Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI).
    8. Featherstone, Allen M. & Moghnieh, Ghassan A. & Goodwin, Barry K., 1995. "Farm-level nonparametric analysis of cost-minimization and profit-maximization behavior," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 13(2), November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:saeaed:6826. 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)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.