IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genstf/2007010108000016024.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating the Conservation Security Program utilizing the perceptions and economics of producer participation: implications for land stewardship in Iowa agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Reich, Denis Andrew

Abstract

Agriculture in the United States (US) has been the focus of a number of studies that address the link between on-farm agricultural practices and the degradation of natural resources. The mounting body of evidence that associates certain cropping and grazing practices with soil and waterway damage points to a need for federal agricultural policy to provide improved conservation incentives for agricultural producers. This study focuses on the first two years of the Conservation Security Program (CSP) in Iowa, a watershed based conservation program introduced with the 2002 Federal Farm Act. This new "green payment" program emphasizes "rewarding the best" stewards of natural resources and "attracting the rest" via reward payments and cost share incentives.;Previous studies of the CSP have been performed in a number of agricultural regions of the US including the Midwest corn belt. All have typically utilized only one research method such as interviews, focus groups, case studies or in-depth examinations of program spending. While collectively these studies have established the promise of the program as well as its limitations, this study provides a thorough examination of the CSP's implemnetation in Iowa, using an approach that combines a statisitically representative mail survey of producers in the state's first four CSP watersheds with 13 in-depth interviews in a complimentary manner.;Results are consistent with the findings of other studies, suggesting that the CSP is rewarding the "status quo" of corn, and soybean crop production in the state with little incentive for producers who have not invested previously in stewardship to improve their standards of conservation. There appears to be little to distinguish among CSP enrollees as program participants were found to be relatively homogeneous, with many already receiving payments through other conservation programs. CSP payments were found to be unevenly distributed among producers, with some probably being over compensated for the costs of their conservation which threatens program compliance with World Trade Organization (WTO) "green box" rules.;Rewarding producers for practices already in place is not lost on long term stewards, as enrollment in traditional conservation programs has typically allocated the highest payments to those practicing the least conservation. With the 2007 Farm Bill in mind, the effectiveness of the CSP at promoting and preserving natural resources could be greatly improved by capitalizing on the current period of high commodity prices by redirecting savings from Loan Deficiency and Counter-Cyclical payments into simplifying the CSP exclusively as a reward program for proven stewards. Additionally, conservation compliance for commodity programs should be improved and enforced so that the environmental benefits of producers practicing "land stewardship" is not undermined by producers unwilling to maintain conservation minimums. Promoting the CSP exclusively as a reward program should provide the needed incentive for unproven land stewards to take advantage of costshare programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) to transition to higher levels of stewardship, increasing the overall acreage of conservation treatment in Iowa and reducing the total area of environmentally damaging practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Reich, Denis Andrew, 2007. "Evaluating the Conservation Security Program utilizing the perceptions and economics of producer participation: implications for land stewardship in Iowa agriculture," ISU General Staff Papers 2007010108000016024, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:2007010108000016024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/cb0b8595-1c85-4e78-bc9f-7b9c5b38c506/content
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dobbs, Thomas L., 2006. "Working Lands Agri-environmental Policy Options and Issues for the Next United States Farm Bill," Economics Staff Papers 32013, South Dakota State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Dobbs, Thomas L., 2006. "Working Lands Agri-environmental Policy Options and Issues for the Next United States Farm Bill," Staff Papers 060003, South Dakota State University, Department of Economics.
    3. Dobbs, Thomas L., 2006. "Agri-environmental Policy Options for Working Lands in the Next United States Farm Bill," Issue Briefs 2006480, South Dakota State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Andrew P. Barkley & Barry L. Flinchbaugh, 1990. "Farm Operator Opinion and Agricultural Policy; Kansas Survey Results," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 12(2), pages 223-239.
    5. Keith O. Fuglie & Catherine A. Kascak, 2001. "Adoption and Diffusion of Natural-Resource-Conserving Agricultural Technology," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 23(2), pages 386-403.
    6. Richard D. Horan & James S. Shortle & David G. Abler, 1999. "Green Payments for Nonpoint Pollution Control," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1210-1215.
    7. Rob A. Cramb, 2005. "Social capital and soil conservation: evidence from the Philippines," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(2), pages 211-226, June.
    8. Tracy R. Bridges, Ted L. Napier, 2003. "Factors that influence farm women to advocate the adoption of environmentally benign agricultural production practices," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(2), pages 201-219.
    9. Dobbs, Thomas L. & Streff, Nicholas J., 2005. "Potential for the Conservation Security Program to Induce More Ecologically Diverse Crop Rotations in the Western Corn Belt," Research Reports 200502, South Dakota State University, Department of Economics.
    10. McNew, Kevin, 2001. "Expanded Crop Rotations and Price Risk Effect," Briefings 29192, Montana State University, Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics, Agricultural Marketing Policy Center.
    11. Westra, John V. & Zimmerman, Julie K. H. & Vondracek, Bruce, 2004. "Do Conservation Practices and Programs Benefit the Intended Resource Concern?," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 105-120, April.
    12. Gary Schnitkey & Marvin Batte & Eugene Jones & Jean Botomogno, 1992. "Information Preferences of Ohio Commercial Farmers: Implications for Extension," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(2), pages 486-496.
    13. Georgina Moreno & David L. Sunding, 2005. "Joint Estimation of Technology Adoption and Land Allocation with Implications for the Design of Conservation Policy," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(4), pages 1009-1019.
    14. Manoj Jha & Jeffrey G. Arnold & Philip W. Gassman, 2006. "Water Quality Modeling for the Raccoon River Watershed Using SWAT," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 06-wp428, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    15. Dobbs, Thomas L. & Streff, Nicholas J., 2005. "Potential for the Conservation Security Program to Induce More Ecologically Diverse Crop Rotations in the Western Corn Belt," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19119, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Chad E. Hart & Bruce A. Babcock, 2001. "Rankings of Risk Management Strategies Combining Crop Insurance Products and Marketing Positions," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 01-wp267, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    17. Cramb, Rob A., 2005. "Social capital and soil conservation: evidence from the Philippines," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(2), pages 1-16.
    18. Scott M. Swinton & Frank Lupi & G. Philip Robertson & Douglas A. Landis, 2006. "Ecosystem Services from Agriculture: Looking Beyond the Usual Suspects," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1160-1166.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    2. Abadi, Bijan & Yadollahi, Arash & Bybordi, Ahmad & Rahmati, Mehdi, 2020. "The discrimination of adopters and non-adopters of conservation agricultural initiatives in northwest Iran: Attitudinal, soil testing, and topographical modules," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    3. Dobbs, Thomas L., 2006. "Working Lands Agri-environmental Policy Options and Issues for the Next United States Farm Bill," Economics Staff Papers 32013, South Dakota State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Daniel Kyalo Willy & Arnim Kuhn, 2016. "Technology Adoption Under Variable Weather Conditions — The Case of Rain Water Harvesting in Lake Naivasha Basin, Kenya," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(02), pages 1-25, June.
    5. Authelet, Manon & Subervie, Julie & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Asquith, Nigel & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2021. "Economic, pro-social and pro-environmental factors influencing participation in an incentive-based conservation program in Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    6. Abdollahzadeh, Gholamhossein & Azadi, Hossein & Sharifzadeh, Mohammad Sharif & Jahangir, Leila & Janečková, Kristina & Sklenička, Petr & Tan, Rong & Witlox, Frank, 2021. "Landholders’ perception of conversion of steep lands to orchard schemes: Land use policy implications in North Iran," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    7. Dalton, Timothy J. & Lilja, Nina K. & Johnson, Nancy & Howeler, Reinhardt, 2011. "Farmer Participatory Research and Soil Conservation in Southeast Asian Cassava Systems," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 2176-2186.
    8. Jones, Nikoleta & Clark, Julian R.A. & Malesios, Chrisovaladis, 2015. "Social capital and willingness-to-pay for coastal defences in south-east England," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 74-82.
    9. Sarah Wheeler & Henning Bjornlund & Martin Shanahan & Alec Zuo, 2009. "Who trades water allocations? Evidence of the characteristics of early adopters in the Goulburn–Murray Irrigation District, Australia 1998–1999*," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(6), pages 631-643, November.
    10. Nikoleta Jones & Konstantinos Evangelinos & Petros Gaganis & Eugenia Polyzou, 2011. "Citizens’ Perceptions on Water Conservation Policies and the Role of Social Capital," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(2), pages 509-522, January.
    11. DeVeau, Vanessa & Marshall, Maria I., 2008. "How Beneficial is Tourism? An Analysis of the Economic Impact of Tourism in Il N'gwesi, Kenya," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6350, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Danilo Marandola & Angelo Belliggiano & Luca Romagnoli & Corrado Ievoli, 2019. "The spread of no-till in conservation agriculture systems in Italy: indications for rural development policy-making," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 7(1), pages 1-22, December.
    13. Meskerem Abi & Aad Kessler & Peter Oosterveer & Degefa Tolossa, 2020. "How farmers’ characteristics influence spontaneous spreading of stone bunds in the highlands of Ethiopia: a case study in the Girar Jarso woreda," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 317-335, January.
    14. Wang, Shun, 2019. "Social capital and Rotating Labor Associations in rural China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 243-253.
    15. Patrick, Ian & Marshall, Graham R. & Abdurrahman, Muktasam & Ambarawati, I Gusti Agung Ayu, 2006. "Determining the Role of Social Capital in Linking Smallholders with Agribusiness," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 139890, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    16. Peter Bridgewater & Mathieu Régnier & Roberto Cruz García, 2015. "Implementing SDG 15: Can large‐scale public programs help deliver biodiversity conservation, restoration and management, while assisting human development?," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(3-4), pages 214-223, August.
    17. Polyzou, E. & Jones, N. & Evangelinos, K.I. & Halvadakis, C.P., 2011. "Willingness to pay for drinking water quality improvement and the influence of social capital," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 74-80, February.
    18. Dobbs, Thomas L., 2006. "Working Lands Agri-environmental Policy Options and Issues for the Next United States Farm Bill," Staff Papers 060003, South Dakota State University, Department of Economics.
    19. Jones, Nikoleta & Filos, Elias & Fates, Eleftherios & Dimitrakopoulos, Panayiotis G., 2015. "Exploring perceptions on participatory management of NATURA 2000 forest sites in Greece," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1-8.
    20. Cramb, Rob A. & Catacutan, Delia & Culasero-Arellano, Z. & Mariano, K., 2006. "The 'Landcare' Approach to Soil Conservation in the Philippines: An Assessment of Farm-Level Impacts," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25370, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    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:isu:genstf:2007010108000016024. 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: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.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.