Much of the research on ecosystem service values (ESVs) has limited applicability to USDA program benefit analyses, largely because the models/data/results (1) lack spatial breadth and hence cannot be applied in national analyses of USDA programs, and (2) do not link land use changes to the changes in ESs. This article provides an overview of a set of 15 ESVs related to agriculture's impacts on erosion in order to identify (1) weaknesses in methods, data, and assumptions that limit the quality of the ESVs and means of avoiding such weaknesses in future ESV development, and (2) approaches that might improve the reliability and spatial resolution of future ESV estimates.

This paper presents the methodology, assumptions, and data used to generate regional and national environmental benefit estimates of the USDA's Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). It's assumed that, without the program, production and conservation practices on CRP lands would be the same as those used on surrounding lands. When range and forest lands are (are not) included as land-use options, 54 (71) percent of the CRP land would be in crop production—which is consistent with past analyses. Soil erosion would be 222 to 248 million tons per year—about 11 percent—higher than the current level. Benefits are estimated by applying environmental benefit models, estimated in previous analyses, to the CRP's estimated effect on erosion and wildlife habitat. Nationally, the CRP is estimated to provide $1.3 billion in annual benefits, which represents 75 to 80 percent of the program's cost. In seven of the 10 USDA Farm Production Regions, the CRP's environmental benefits exceed costs. Thus, reallocating acreage to these regions could increase net program benefits. However, because many benefits could not be estimated, one cannot conclude that regional and national benefits do not exceed costs.

Public support for integrated pest management (IPM) is derived in part from concerns over food safety and the environment, yet few studies have assessed the economic value of health and environmental benefits of IPM. An approach is suggested for such an assessment and applied to the Virginia peanut IPM program. Effects of IPM on environmental risks posed by pesticides are assessed and society's willingness to pay to reduce those risks is estimated. The annual environmental benefits of the peanut IPM program are estimated at $844,000. The estimates of pesticide risks and willingness to pay can be applied elsewhere in economic assessments of IPM.

The objective of this research is to develop an economic analysis of different crop mix biofuels programs for meeting ethanol and sustainability demands. Primary data are from South Dakota State University field experiments on farms located in east-central South Dakota. The data include 4 years of field data, three crop systems (mixed grass, switchgrass and corn), two residue treatments (no removal, removal of biomass), and three landscape positions (back slope, crest and foot slope). A representative farm model and five scenarios are developed to conduct a full budget analysis over a 12-year period. Public benefits are evaluated, using the benefit transfer method to value ecosystem services, by allocating a dollar value to three environmental variables; carbon sequestration, reduction of sedimentation and pheasant production. Stochastic simulation results are compared for each of the five scenarios, one with only annualized net private returns, and one including the value of environmental benefits. Results indicate that: (1) the conventional continuous corn scenario has the highest net returns over the 12-year budget, (2) carbon sequestration represents 80% of the environmental benefits, and (3) the added economic value of ecosystem services does not provide enough incentives for farmers to convert from corn production to grass production.