IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uersrr/7257.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Balancing the Multiple Objectives of Conservation Programs

Author

Listed:
  • Cattaneo, Andrea
  • Hellerstein, Daniel
  • Nickerson, Cynthia J.
  • Myers, Christina

Abstract

Many of the Nation’s conservation programs seek to achieve multiple environmental objectives. Implementing a multi-objective program efficiently requires program managers to balance different environmental and cost objectives. A number of conservation programs use an index approach to prioritize objectives and rank program applications. This approach keeps program objectives distinct and enables program managers to use weights to determine the relative importance of each objective. This report provides empirical evidence on the environmental and cost tradeoffs of different index weighting schemes in USDA’s Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The analyses take into account both land characteristics and how changes to an index affect producer decisions to voluntarily apply. While small changes in index weights do not markedly affect the outcomes of the CRP, larger changes can have a moderate effect. Opportunities for obtaining multiple environmental benefits simultaneously by increasing the index weight on one objective appear limited, and increasing an objective’s index weight by at least 20 percent can trigger losses of benefits related to other objectives. Weight changes in smaller incremental program enrollments also result in more tradeoffs than in very large program enrollments.

Suggested Citation

  • Cattaneo, Andrea & Hellerstein, Daniel & Nickerson, Cynthia J. & Myers, Christina, 2006. "Balancing the Multiple Objectives of Conservation Programs," Economic Research Report 7257, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:uersrr:7257
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.7257
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/7257/files/er060019.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.7257?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Zilberman, 1996. "The Economics of a Public Fund for Environmental Amenities: A Study of CRP Contracts," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(4), pages 961-971.
    2. Ebert, Udo & Welsch, Heinz, 2004. "Meaningful environmental indices: a social choice approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 270-283, March.
    3. McCann, Laura M.J. & Easter, K. William, 2000. "Estimates Of Public Sector Transaction Costs In Nrcs Programs," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 32(3), pages 1-9, December.
    4. Katherine Falconer & Pierre Dupraz & Martin Whitby, 2001. "An Investigation of Policy Administrative Costs Using Panel Data for the English Environmentally Sensitive Areas," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 83-103, January.
    5. Ferraro, Paul J., 2003. "Conservation Contracting in Heterogeneous Landscapes: An Application to Watershed Protection and Threshold Constraints," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 32(1), pages 1-12, April.
    6. Ferraro, Paul J., 2003. "Conservation Contracting in Heterogeneous Landscapes: An Application to Watershed Protection with Threshold Constraints," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 53-64, April.
    7. repec:ags:joaaec:v:32:y:2000:i:3:p:555-563 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Hellerstein, Daniel & Nickerson, Cynthia J. & Cooper, Joseph C. & Feather, Peter & Gadsby, Dwight M. & Mullarkey, Daniel J. & Tegene, Abebayehu & Barnard, Charles H., 2002. "Farmland Protection: The Role Of Public Preferences For Rural Amenities," Agricultural Economic Reports 33963, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    9. Howard D. Leathers, 1991. "Allocable Fixed Inputs as a Cause of Joint Production: A Cost Function Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1083-1090.
    10. Ribaudo, Marc & Kaplan, Jonathan D. & Christensen, Lee A. & Gollehon, Noel R. & Johansson, Robert C. & Breneman, Vincent E. & Aillery, Marcel P. & Agapoff, Jean & Peters, Mark, 2003. "Manure Management For Water Quality Costs To Animal Feeding Operations Of Applying Manure Nutrients To Land," Agricultural Economic Reports 33911, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Bellenger, Moriah J. & Herlihy, Alan T., 2010. "Performance-based environmental index weights: Are all metrics created equal?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1043-1050, March.
    2. Ozgoc-Caglar, C. Derya & Farnsworth, Richard L., 2008. "A Multiple Criteria Decision System to Improve Performance of Federal Conservation Programs," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 5986, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. Le Lan & Md Sayed Iftekhar & James Fogarty & Steven Schilizzi, 2021. "Auctions for buying back groundwater for environmental purposes: Which design performs better?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 931-948, September.
    4. Jonah Busch, 2013. "Supplementing REDD+ with Biodiversity Payments: The Paradox of Paying for Multiple Ecosystem Services - Working Paper 347," Working Papers 347, Center for Global Development.
    5. Blandford, David & Hodge, Ian D., 2012. "Adapting Agri-Environment Schemes for Greenhouse Gas Mitigation – Observations from U.K. and U.S. Experience," 86th Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2012, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 135517, Agricultural Economics Society.
    6. Boisvert, Richard N. & Blandford, David, 2012. "Meeting multiple policy objectives under GHG emission reduction targets," 86th Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2012, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 135515, Agricultural Economics Society.
    7. Hellerstein, Daniel, 2006. "Modeling Conservation Program Impacts: Accounting for participation using bootstrapping," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21090, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Boisvert, Richard N. & Blandford, David, 2011. "Meeting multiple policy objectives under GHG emissions reduction targets," Working Papers 126617, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    9. Thilo W. Glebe, 2022. "The influence of contract length on the performance of sequential conservation auctions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 739-764, March.
    10. Astill, Gregory & Perez, Agnes & Thornsbury, Suzanne, 2020. "Developing Automation and Mechanization for Specialty Crops: A Review of U.S. Department of Agriculture Programs: A Report to Congress," Administrative Publications 320792, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    11. Whitten, Stuart M., 2017. "Designing and implementing conservation tender metrics: Twelve core considerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 561-571.

    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., 2004. "Multifunctionality, Agricultural Policy, and Environmental Policy," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 33(1), pages 1-10, April.
    2. Legras, Sophie & Martin, Elsa & Piguet, Virginie, 2018. "Conjunctive Implementation of Land Sparing and Land Sharing for Environmental Preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 170-187.
    3. Whitten, Stuart M., 2017. "Designing and implementing conservation tender metrics: Twelve core considerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 561-571.
    4. Wunscher, Tobias & Engel, Stefanie & Wunder, Sven, 2011. "Practical Alternatives to Estimate Opportunity Costs of Forest Conservation," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115774, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Coggan, Anthea & Whitten, Stuart M. & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Influences of transaction costs in environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1777-1784, July.
    6. Wünscher, Tobias & Engel, Stefanie & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: A tool for boosting conservation benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 822-833, May.
    7. Coggan, Anthea & Buitelaar, Edwin & Whitten, Stuart & Bennett, Jeff, 2013. "Factors that influence transaction costs in development offsets: Who bears what and why?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 222-231.
    8. Ferraro, Paul J., 2008. "Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 810-821, May.
    9. Claassen, Roger & Duquette, Eric & Horowitz, John & Kohei, Ueda, 2014. "Additionality in U.S. Agricultural Conservation and Regulatory Offset Programs," Economic Research Report 180414, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    10. Suter, Jordan F. & Conrad, Jon M. & Gomes, Carla P. & van Hoeve, Willem Jan & Sabharwal, Ashish, 2008. "Optimal Corridor Design for Grizzly Bear in the U.S. Northern Rockies," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6207, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Pannell, David J. & Roberts, Anna M. & Park, Geoff & Alexander, Jennifer, 2013. "Improving environmental decisions: A transaction-costs story," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 244-252.
    12. Shahab, Sina & Clinch, J. Peter & O’Neill, Eoin, 2018. "Accounting for transaction costs in planning policy evaluation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 263-272.
    13. DeBoe, Gwendolen & Stephenson, Kurt, 2016. "Transactions costs of expanding nutrient trading to agricultural working lands: A Virginia case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 176-185.
    14. Kroeger, Timm, 2013. "The quest for the “optimal” payment for environmental services program: Ambition meets reality, with useful lessons," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 65-74.
    15. Conrad, Jon M. & Gomes, Carla P. & van Hoeve, Willem-Jan & Sabharwal, Ashish & Suter, Jordan F., 2012. "Wildlife corridors as a connected subgraph problem," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-18.
    16. Baylis, Kathy & Peplow, Stephen & Rausser, Gordon & Simon, Leo, 2008. "Agri-environmental policies in the EU and United States: A comparison," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 753-764, May.
    17. Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 663-674, May.
    18. McCann, Laura & Colby, Bonnie & Easter, K. William & Kasterine, Alexander & Kuperan, K.V., 2005. "Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 527-542, March.
    19. Yang, Wanhong & Bryan, Brett A. & MacDonald, Darla Hatton & Ward, John R. & Wells, Geoff & Crossman, Neville D. & Connor, Jeffrey D., 2010. "A conservation industry for sustaining natural capital and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 680-689, February.
    20. Hongli Feng & Catherine L. Kling & Lyubov A. Kurkalova & Silvia Secchi & Philip W. Gassman, 2005. "The Conservation Reserve Program in the Presence of a Working Land Alternative: Implications for Environmental Quality, Program Participation, and Income Transfer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1231-1238.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    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:uersrr:7257. 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/ersgvus.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.