Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:59:21.832Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Implementation of new Conservation Programs and the Need to Respond to Changing Market Conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Clayton W. Ogg  and
Ralph E. Heimlich
Clayton W. Ogg
Affiliation:
Natural Resource Economics Division. Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Ralph E. Heimlich
Affiliation:
Natural Resource Economics Division. Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Under new federal programs, soil and water conservation practices are relied upon to make a major contribution to the control of nonpoint sources of water pollution. Economic efficiency is to be considered in selecting these practices. Although only an experimental program funding of $50 million has been appropriated, $400 million of Rural Clean Water Program funds in 1980 were authorized. The program is to be administered by the Secretary of Agriculture with the concurrence of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Because its implementation may eventually necessitate major land use changes and capital investments as part of 5- to 10-year contracts with farmers, we examine how soil conservation plans can incorporate potential changes in market prices of crops.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , July 1980 , pp. 173 - 177
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1980

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

Cory, D. C. and Timmons, J. F.. “Responsiveness of Soil Erosion Losses in the Corn Belt to Increased Demands for Agricultural Products.” J. Soil and Water Cons. 3(1978):221–6.Google Scholar
Casier, George R. and Jacobs, James J.. “Economic Analysis of Reducing Phosphorus Losses from Agricultural Production,” pp. 169–215 in Nitrogen and Phosphorus: Food Production, Waste and the Environment, Porter, K. S., ed. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Ann Arbor Science, 1975.Google Scholar
Karr, James P. and Schlosser, Isaac. “Water Resources and the Land-Water Interface.” Science 201(1978):229–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Office of Business Economics, U.S. Dept. of Commerce/Economic Research Service, USDA. “1972 OBERS Projections of Economic Activity in the United States,” Vol. 1-7, 1974.Google Scholar
Pionke, H. “Report to the Northeast Regional Section 208 Interagency Committee,” Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pa., 1977.Google Scholar
Schneider, R. R. “Planning Diffuse Pollution Control: An Analytical Framework.” Water Resources Bull. 14(1978):322–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, C. Robert and Klaus Frohberg. “The Welfare Effects of Erosion Controls, Banning Pesticides, and Limiting Fertilizer Application in the Corn Belt.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 59(1977): 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Congress. Clean Water Act of 1977. 95th Congress, PL 95-217, Dec. 27, 1977.Google Scholar
Wade, J. C. and Heady, E. O.. “Controlling Nonpoint Sediment Sources with Cropland Management: A National Economic Assessment.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 59(1977):13–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wischmeier, W. H. “Use and Misuse of the Universal Soil Loss Equation.” J. Soil and Water Cons. 31(1976):5–9.Google Scholar
Wischmeier, W. H. and Smith, D. D.. “Predicting Rainfall-Erosion Losses from Cropland East of the Rocky Mountains.” ARS, USDA Agr. Handbook No. 282, 1965.Google Scholar