Estimating Trade Liberalization Effects for U.S. Grains and Cotton

Haley, Stephen L.; Herlihy, Michael; Johnston, Brian G.

doi:10.2307/1349555

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the Plains states, fallow land is the most obvious example; however, idled cropland also may include land with a high incidence of crop failure because of moisture conditions or marginal soils. Idled land can affect slippage when it is brought into production to compensate for the land taken out of production (Haley et al 1991). In the Central Plains states, where much of the land is susceptible to wind erosion, slipped acres negate the positive erosion con-trol effects of a reserve program.…”

Section: Slippage and Its Impact On Previous Reserve Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Conservation Reserve Programs and Land ‘Slippage’ in Southwestern Kansas

Leathers

Harrington

2000

The Professional Geographer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Historically land reserve programs have been used to reduce soil erosion. Slippage, which occurs when the number of acres enrolled in a reserve program is not met by an equivalent reduction of acreage in production, has limited reserve success, however. This study addresses the effect of slippage on conservation reserves in southwestern Kansas from 1988-1994. Slippage has varied considerably on both spatial and temporal bases. At one extreme the programs were 100% successful in removing land from production, but at the other extreme, slippage rendered reserve programs nearly useless. Overall, slippage in the study area has greatly reduced conservation reserve effectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Slippage and Its Impact On Previous Reserve Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Conservation Reserve Programs and Land ‘Slippage’ in Southwestern Kansas

Leathers

Harrington

2000

The Professional Geographer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers have used the model extensively to analyse trade policies (Dixit and Roningen, 1989;Haley et al, 1991;Krissoff et al, 1989;Roningen and Dixit, 1991;Webb et al, 1989) and effects of climate change (Reilly and Hohmann, 1993;Tobey et al, 1992). Roningen (1986) and Sullivan et al (1992) provide detailed descriptions of the model.…”

Section: Model Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic improvements in major US crops: the size and distribution of benefits

Frisvold

Sullivan

Raneses

2003

Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The distribution of welfare gains of genetic improvements in major US crops is estimated using a world agricultural trade model. Multi‐market welfare estimates were 75% larger than estimates based on the price‐exogenous ‘change in revenue’ method frequently used by plant breeders. Annual benefits of these genetic improvements range from US$ 400–600 million depending on the supply shift specification. Of this, 44–60% accrues to the US, 24–34% accrues to other developed countries. Developing and transitional economies capture 16–22% of the welfare gain. The global benefits of a one‐time permanent increase in US yields are US$ 8.1 billion (discounted at 10%) and US$ 15.4 billion (discounted at 5%). Gains to consumers in developing and transitional economies range from US$ 6.1 billion (10% discount rate) to US$ 11.6 billion (5% discount rate).

show abstract

“…Researchers have used the model extensively to analyse trade policies (Dixit and Roningen, 1989;Haley et al, 1991;Krksoff et al, 1989;Roningen and Dixit, 1991;Webb et al, 1989) and effects of climate change (Reilly and Hohmann, 1993;Tobey et a]., 1992).…”

Section: Model Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic improvements in major US crops: the size and distribution of benefits

Frisvold

Sullivan

Raneses

2003

Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The distribution of welfare gains of genetic improvements in major US crops is estimated using a world agricultural trade model. Multi-market welfare estimates were 75% larger than estimates based on the pnce-exogenous 'change in revenue' method frequently used by plant breeders. Annual benefits of these genetic improvements range from US$400-600 million depending on the supply shift specification. Of this, 4440% accrues to the US, 2634% accrues to other developed countries. Developing and transitional economies capture 1622% of the welfare gain.

show abstract

Estimating Trade Liberalization Effects for U.S. Grains and Cotton

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Effectiveness of Conservation Reserve Programs and Land ‘Slippage’ in Southwestern Kansas

Effectiveness of Conservation Reserve Programs and Land ‘Slippage’ in Southwestern Kansas

Genetic improvements in major US crops: the size and distribution of benefits

Genetic improvements in major US crops: the size and distribution of benefits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About