IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ucozrr/290064.html

Economic Impacts of Agriculture in Eight Northeastern States

Author

Listed:
  • Lopez, Rigoberto A.
  • Plesha, Nataliya
  • Campbell, Benjamin

Abstract

The objective of this report was to provide information to producers, policy makers, and other interested stakeholders on the both the agricultural producer perceived and data driven regulatory environment of Northeastern states. Notably the specific objectives were: Identify regulatory perceptions of Northeastern agricultural producers; quantify the regulatory environment via a data driven index computation; rank states within the Northeast as well as select comparable states throughout the United States; provide recommendations on the state level to lessen the regulatory burden for Northeastern states. Findings: Overall, agricultural producers in the Northeast indicated the number of regulations to be increasing since 2010. Furthermore, the amount of time and money spent on the regulations was also increasing. State regulations were found to have the most impact on producers changing their farming practices, followed by federal and to a lesser extent municipal regulations. Perceptions of regulatory impact are not always consistent with data driven indices. Several states ranking low on regulatory burden had a majority of agricultural producers perceiving there to be a high regulatory burden. In contrast, some states with a high burden had the perception of “just-right” or under-regulated. New Jersey was found to be the least regulated state while Maine and New Hampshire were the most regulated, according to this study’s calculations. It is important to note that these rankings are relative to the other states in this study. On the whole, Northeastern states were more regulated than comparison states from around the United States. Of the sixteen states in the regulatory index, five of the bottom six were in the Northeast. Northeastern states, in general, moved around in how well they performed in the different policy components. Some states scored well in tax policy regulation but low in labor while others did well in labor but scored poorly in environmental. Thus
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Lopez, Rigoberto A. & Plesha, Nataliya & Campbell, Benjamin, "undated". "Economic Impacts of Agriculture in Eight Northeastern States," Research Reports 290064, University of Connecticut, Charles J. Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ucozrr:290064
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.290064
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/290064/files/outreach-presentations_4_1066457636.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.290064?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:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Bruno, Christopher C. & Campbell, Benjamin L., 2016. "Students’ Willingness to Pay for More Local, Organic, Non-GMO and General Food Options," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 47(3), pages 1-17, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    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:ucozrr:290064. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    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/fmuctus.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.