Targeting Soil Conservation Incentive Payments

Abstract

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.

Green Subsidies in Agriculture: Estimating the Adoption Costs of Conservation Tillage from Observed Behavior

“…Second, we decompose the subsidy into two components: the profit loss (or gain) from adoption and the premium associated with uncertainty. In so doing, we confirm the arguments of agronomists and extension agents that conservation tillage pays (Jolly et al 1983; Setia and Osborn 1989; Fox et al 1991; Stonehouse 1995): on average in our sample, a farmer gains from adoption. However, the adoption premium may exceed the profit gain, and consequently the farmer may require a subsidy to adopt the practice.…”

What Explains the Incidence of the Use of a Common Sediment Control on Lots with Houses Under Construction?

“…Researchers have extensively studied factors that explain whether farmers adopt certain management practices that conserve soil (e.g., Fuglie, 1999;Lynne, Shonkwiler, and Rola, 1988;Paudel et al, 2008;Soule, Tegene, and Wiebe, 2000) and how government can promote conservation (e.g., Setia and Osborn, 1989) in the United States However, the use of erosion and sediment controls (ESCs) for nonagricultural activities that disturb land has not been well studied. In a seminal paper, Burby and Paterson (1993) analyzed, among other things, the effects of site characteristics, capacity and commitment of developers, and the enforcement system on the degree to which sediment traps were actually installed as specified in approved ESC plans at construction sites during the summer of 1989 in North Carolina.…”