Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T00:39:13.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Decoupled Direct Payments under Base Acreage and Yield Updating Uncertainty: An Investigation of Agricultural Chemical Use

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Janet G. Peckham  and
Jaclyn D. Kropp
Janet G. Peckham
Affiliation:
John E. Walker Department of Economics at Clemson University
Jaclyn D. Kropp
Affiliation:
Food and Resource Economics Department at the University of Florida
Get access

Abstract

We analyze the impacts of agricultural subsidies on farm-level production decisions and input use under price, yield, and policy uncertainty for a risk-averse farmer. Using U.S. farm-level data and weighted ordinary least squares, we find that decoupled payments had little impact on agricultural chemical expenditures (our proxy for use) when the payments were first introduced in 1996. However, after 2004 there is a positive, significant relationship between decoupled payments and agricultural chemical expenditures. The results suggest that updating, introduced in 2002, and expectations of future updating caused decoupled payments to become coupled to current input use and, ultimately, production.

Keywords

decoupled paymentsexpectationsinput useproduction decisionsupdating
Type
Research Article
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , August 2012 , pp. 158 - 174
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, G., Westhoff, P., Willott, B., and Young, R.E. 2001. “Do ‘Decoupled’ Payments Affect U.S. Crop Area? Preliminary Evidence from 1997–2000.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 83(5): 1190–1195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahearn, M.C., El-Osta, H., and Dewbre, J. 2006. “The Impact of Coupled and Decoupled Government Subsidies on Off-Farm Labor Participation of U.S. Farm Operators.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88(2): 393–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bai, J., and Perron, P. 2003. “Computation and Analysis of Multiple Structural Change Models.” Journal of Applied Econometrics 18(1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Bhaskar, A., and Beghin, J.C. 2010. “Decoupled Farm Payments and the Role of Base Acreage and Yield Updating under Uncertainty.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 92(3): 849–858.Google Scholar
Blandford, D., de Gorter, H., and Harvey, D. 1989. “Farm Income Support with Minimal Trade Distortions.” Food Policy 14: 268–273.Google Scholar
Bloomberg. 2010. “Monthly Corn Futures Contract Prices, 1995–2007, Bloomberg LP.” Unpublished database (accessed April 2 2010). A copy of this material is on file with the authors.Google Scholar
Borges, R., and Thurman, W. 1994. “Marketing Quotas and Random Yields: Marginal Effects of Inframarginal Subsidies on Peanut Supply.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76: 809–817.Google Scholar
Burfisher, M.E., and Hopkins, J., eds. 2004. “Decoupled Payments in a Changing Policy Setting.” Agricultural Economic Report AER838, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Chau, N.H., and de Gorter, H. 2005. “Disentangling the Consequences of Direct Payment Schemes in Agriculture on Fixed Costs, Exit Decisions, and Output.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87(5): 1174–1181.Google Scholar
Coble, K.H., Miller, J.C., and Hudson, M. 2008. “Decoupled Farm Payments and Expectations for Base Updating.” Review of Agricultural Economics 30(1): 27–42.Google Scholar
de Gorter, H., Just, D.R., and Kropp, J.D. 2008. “Crosssubsidization due to Inframarginal Support in Agriculture: A General Theory and Empirical Evidence.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90(1): 42–54.Google Scholar
Economic Research Service. 2002. “2002 Farm Bill: Provisions and Economic Implications.” ERS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Economic Research Service. 2003. “2003 ARMS Costs and Returns Report Version 1.” ERS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Economic Research Service. 2008. “2008 Farm Bill Side-by-Side.” ERS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Available at http://www.ers.usda.gov/FarmBill/2008/Titles/TitleIcommodities.htm (accessed August 2011).Google Scholar
Economic Research Service. 2010. “Fertilizer Use and Prices.” ERS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Available at http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FertilizerUse (accessed August 2011).Google Scholar
Goodwin, B.K., and Mishra, A.K. 2006. “Are ‘Decoupled’ Farm Program Payments Really Decoupled? An Empirical Evaluation.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88(1): 73–89.Google Scholar
Heimlich, R. 2000. “Farm Resource Regions.” Agricultural Information Bulletin 760, ERS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Hennessy, D.A. 1998. “The Production Effects of Agricultural Income Support Policies under Uncertainty.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80(1): 46–57.Google Scholar
Horowitz, J.K., and Lichtenberg, E. 1993. “Insurance, Moral Hazard, and Chemical Use in Agriculture.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75(4): 926–935.Google Scholar
Kirwan, B.E. 2009. “The Incidence of U.S. Agricultural Subsidies on Farmland Rental Rates.” Journal of Political Economy 117(1): 138–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2011. Unpublished data on the Agricultural Resource Management Survey, Phase II and Phase III. NASS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
Rajsic, P., Weersink, A., and Gandorfer, M. 2009. “Risk and Nitrogen Application Levels.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie 57(2): 223–239.Google Scholar
Ramaswami, B. 1992. “Production Risk and Optimal Input Decisions.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 74(4): 860–869.Google Scholar
Rucker, R., and Thurman, W. 1990. “The Economic Effects of Supply Controls: The Simple Analytics of the U.S. Peanut Program.” Journal of Law and Economics 33(2): 483–515.Google Scholar
Rucker, R., Thurman, W., and Sumner, D. 1995. “Restricting the Market for Quota: An Analysis of Tobacco Production Rights with Corroboration from Congressional Testimony.” Journal of Political Economy 103(1): 142–175.Google Scholar
Young, C.E., and Shields, D.A. 1996. “1996 FAIR Act Frames Farm Policy for Seven Years.” Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Available at http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/agoutlook/aosupp.pdf (accessed (August 2011).Google Scholar