IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ias/cpaper/21-pb32.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Iowa Residents and Farmers Care about Improving Water Quality and Reducing Harmful Algal Blooms? Results from Two Household Surveys

Author

Abstract

Nutrient pollution from agricultural non-point source runoff is one of the most critical water resource issues in the United States today. The establishment of the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Task Force to address hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico led to the creation of the 2013 Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy. However, implementing these efforts is costly and requires significant federal and state funding. For example, in 2018, Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds' first legislation provided $282 million over 12 years to fund edge-of-field and in-field infrastructure projects designed to meet nutrient reduction strategy goals and to fund projects to improve the quality of Iowa's surface water, ground water, and drinking water. Understanding the economic benefits from reducing nutrient pollution is essential to justify these investments and determine the direction of conservation programs. This policy brief uses recent results from two household surveys in 2019 and 2020 to gauge Iowans' perceptions and attitudes toward water quality issues and associated policies. Iowa Water Center grants funded both surveys. Iowa State University's Center for Survey Statistics and Methodology conducted the surveys in summer 2019 and summer 2020. The data collection process followed Dillman's mixed-mode (web/mail) survey design. The first wave of the survey targeted the general public and received a total of 858 completed surveys during the data collection period, a response rate of 28.7%. The second wave of the survey targeted farmers in the Boone and North Raccoon River watersheds and received a total of 493 surveys during the data collection period, a response rate of 49.4%. Major findings from the two surveys are as follows: Farmers believe water quality is less of a concern than the general public. Thirty-two percent of the public and 55% farmers think Iowa's water quality is good or very good. Half of the general public and 30% of farmers think algal blooms are very harmful. Thirty-five percent of the general public and 26% of farmers are concerned about nitrates in drinking water in their neighborhood. Iowans increasingly regard harmful algal blooms as an important issue. Sixty percent of respondents have seen algal blooms at least once in person. Fifty-eight percent of Iowa general public is at least somewhat aware of algal blooms in Iowa's lakes. Twenty percent of the general public has no awareness of algal blooms in Iowa's lakes. The knowledge of and views about the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy is somewhat mixed and differs between farmers and the general public. Sixty percent of the general public and 32% of farmers think agriculture (manure + fertilizer) is the biggest source of excessive nutrients in Iowa's lakes. More than 60% of the general public and 20% of farmers have no familiarity with the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy. Forty-seven percent of farmers agree or strongly agree that the strategy is a feasible plan to reduce nutrients, 42% are neutral or do not know. Nearly 40% of the general public has no familiarity with the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico. The majority of the general public, but only 22% of farmers, consider a special sales tax on all fertilizer the most appropriate way to fund lake protection programs in Iowa. Thirty percent of farmers chose a recreational fee as the best way to fund the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Yau-Huo Shr & Wendong Zhang, 2021. "Do Iowa Residents and Farmers Care about Improving Water Quality and Reducing Harmful Algal Blooms? Results from Two Household Surveys," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 21-pb32, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
  • Handle: RePEc:ias:cpaper:21-pb32
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.card.iastate.edu/products/publications/pdf/21pb32.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.card.iastate.edu/products/publications/synopsis/?p=1323
    File Function: Online Synopsis
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mainul Hoque & Catherine L. Kling, 2016. "Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Benefits from Conservation Practices Targeted in Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy 2013: A Non Market Valuation Approach," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 16-wp561, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    2. Hongxing Liu & Wendong Zhang & Elena Irwin & Jeffrey Kast & Noel Aloysius & Jay Martin & Margaret Kalcic, 2020. "Best Management Practices and Nutrient Reduction: An Integrated Economic-Hydrologic Model of the Western Lake Erie Basin," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 96(4), pages 510-530.
    3. Chuan Tang & Gabriel E. Lade & David A. Keiser & Catherine L. Kling & Yongjie Ji & Yau-Huo Shr, 2018. "Economic Benefits of Nitrogen Reductions in Iowa," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 21-sr116, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    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. Yau-Huo Shr & Wendong Zhang, 2021. "Does Omitting Downstream Water Quality Change the Economic Benefits of Nutrient Reduction? Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 21-wp620, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    2. Chai, Yuan & Pannell, David J. & Pardey, Philip G., 2022. "Reducing Water Pollution from Nitrogen Fertilizer: Revisiting Insights from Production Economics," Staff Papers 320519, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    3. Shr, Yau-Huo Jimmy & Zhang, Wendong, 2021. "Does Omitting Downstream Water Quality Change the Economic Benefits of Nutrient Reduction Programs: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313927, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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. Yau-Huo Shr & Wendong Zhang, 2021. "Does Omitting Downstream Water Quality Change the Economic Benefits of Nutrient Reduction? Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 21-wp620, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    2. Shr, Yau-Huo Jimmy & Zhang, Wendong, 2021. "Does Omitting Downstream Water Quality Change the Economic Benefits of Nutrient Reduction Programs: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313927, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Howard, Gregory E. & Zhang, Wendong & Valcu-Lisman, Adriana M., 2021. "Evaluating the Efficiency-Participation Tradeoff in Agricultural Conservation Programs: The Effect of Reverse Auctions, Spatial Targeting, and Higher Offered Payments," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313926, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Massey, Raymond E. & Gedikoglu, Haluk, 2021. "Manure application rules and environmental considerations," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    5. Liu, Yanan & Klaiber, Allen, 2022. "The Impact of Harmful Algal Blooms on Household Averting Expenditure," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322117, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Yanan Liu & H. Allen Klaiber, 2023. "Don’t Drink the Water! The Impact of Harmful Algal Blooms on Household Averting Expenditure," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 86(1), pages 29-55, October.
    7. Madhu Khanna, 2022. "Breakthroughs at the disciplinary nexus: Rewards and challenges for applied economists," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 475-492, March.
    8. David Wolf & Sathya Gopalakrishnan & H. Allen Klaiber, 2022. "Staying afloat: The effect of algae contamination on Lake Erie housing prices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(5), pages 1701-1723, October.
    9. Ancev, Tihomir & Carriquiry, Miguel A. & Frabasile, Franco & Saracho, Andres & Rosas, Juan Francisco, 2023. "The assessment of economic and environmental impacts of water use efficiency and farm practices through an economic and biophysical integrated model," 2023 Annual Meeting, July 23-25, Washington D.C. 335895, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Schilling, Keith E. & Streeter, Matthew T. & Vogelgesang, Jason & Jones, Christopher S. & Seeman, Anthony, 2020. "Subsurface nutrient export from a cropped field to an agricultural stream: Implications for targeting edge-of-field practices," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    11. Gregory Howard & Wendong Zhang & Adriana Valcu‐Lisman & Philip W. Gassman, 2024. "Evaluating the tradeoff between cost effectiveness and participation in agricultural conservation programs," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(2), pages 712-738, March.
    12. Souto, Augusto & Carriquiry, Miguel A. & Rosas, Juan Francisco, 2021. "Assessing the Impact of Agricultural Intensification on Water Pollution: An Integrated Model Assessment of the San Salvador Basin in Uruguay," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 314037, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    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:ias:cpaper:21-pb32. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caiasus.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.