This paper presents a model for estimating the change in conservation reserve program (CRP) contract extensions as a function of the change in rental rates. The majority of the CRP contracts on approximately 36 million acres of enrolled land are expiring within the next two years, with the result that re-enrollment decisions by farmers and the federal government will have high budgetary implications. In a modification of the traditional dichotomous choice method for estimating random utility models in consumer surveys, we develop an ordered response referendum model that allows us to explicitly model the range in rental rates over which the representative farmer may be ambivalent to renewing the CRP contract. We use the empirical results from the ordered response model to estimate acreage re-enrollment as a function of the rental rate.
Culture-based methods to measure
Escherichia coli
(
E. coli
) are used by beach administrators to inform whether bacteria levels represent an elevated risk to swimmers. Since results take up to 12 h, statistical models are used to forecast bacteria levels in lieu of test results; however they underestimate days with elevated fecal indicator bacteria levels. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) tests return results within 3 h but are 2–5 times more expensive than culture-based methods. This paper presents a prediction model which uses limited deployments of qPCR tested sites with inter-beach correlation to predict when bacteria will exceed acceptable thresholds. The model can be used to inform management decisions on when to warn residents or close beaches due to exposure to the bacteria. Using data from Chicago collected between 2006 and 2016, the model proposed in this paper increased sensitivity from 3.4 percent to 11.2 percent–a 230 percent increase. We find that the correlation between beaches are substantial enough to provide higher levels of precision and sensitivity to predictive models. Thus, limited deployments of qPCR testing can be used to deliver better predictions for beach administrators at lower cost and less complexity.
: Forecasts of 1980 river basin water use presented in the reports of the 1960 Senate Select Committee on National Water Resources and in the Water Resources Council's First National Water Assessment of 1968 were compared to estimates of actual use in 1980 to assess the accuracy of efforts to forecast future water use. Results show that the majority of the forecasts were substantially in error. In general, the First National Assessment forecasts erred by a smaller margin, but tended to repeat the regional patterns of overestimation (underestimation) exhibited in the Senate Select Committee forecasts. Moreover, forecasts of the two groups that came within 20 percent of the 1980 withdrawals, in general were accurate, not because of superior prediction, but because of offsetting errors in forecast components. This performance leads us to conclude that water use forecasts, regardless of the time‐frame or the forecast method employed, are likely to always be highly inaccurate. Accordingly, if such forecasting efforts are to be of value in contemporary water resources planning, forecasters should direct their attention toward methods which will illuminate the determinants of the demand for water.
An economic criterion to identify the minimum variable incentive payment rates needed to induce farmers to adopt conservation practices is presented. The Erosion Productivity Economics Model (EPEM) was used to compare various conservation management systems to achieve established levels of erosion control. Findings suggest that there could be substantial net savings by targeting and recognizing the productivity impacts.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.