Cynthia J. Nickerson

Protecting Rural Amenities Through Farmland Preservation Programs

We investigate what farmland preservation programs reveal about the importance of protecting different rural amenities. An extensive content analysis of the enabling legislation of various farmland protection programs suggests wide variation exists in the protection of amenities. An analysis of 27 individual Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) programs’ selection criteria suggests these programs favor preserving amenities that are jointly provided by cropland and livestock operations. These PDR selection criteria also reveal unique preferences regarding the spatial patterns of preserved agricultural lands. Variation in relative weights given to protecting most parcel characteristics in PDR programs is not easily explained by factors that characterize areas experiencing farmland losses.

Balancing the Multiple Objectives of Conservation Programs

Many of the Nation’s conservation programs seek to achieve multiple environmental objectives. Implementing a multi-objective program efficiently requires program managers to balance different environmental and cost objectives. A number of conservation programs use an index approach to prioritize objectives and rank program applications. This approach keeps program objectives distinct and enables program managers to use weights to determine the relative importance of each objective. This report provides empirical evidence on the environmental and cost tradeoffs of different index weighting schemes in USDA’s Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The analyses take into account both land characteristics and how changes to an index affect producer decisions to voluntarily apply. While small changes in index weights do not markedly affect the outcomes of the CRP, larger changes can have a moderate effect. Opportunities for obtaining multiple environmental benefits simultaneously by increasing the index weight on one objective appear limited, and increasing an objective’s index weight by at least 20 percent can trigger losses of benefits related to other objectives. Weight changes in smaller incremental program enrollments also result in more tradeoffs than in very large program enrollments.

Regulation, Open Space, and the Value of Land Undergoing Residential Subdivision

We investigate the effects of forest conservation requirements and zoning on the value of land undergoing subdivision. Land prices are increasing in the percentage of subdivision acreage developers are required to keep in forest, suggesting that forest conservation regulations increase the amounts of forested open space that developers provide. Benefits from open-space amenities remain largely internal to the subdivision, so that land market incentives mitigate the justification for open space preservation policies. Consistent with theoretical predictions that zoning promotes sprawl, we find that minimum-lot-size zoning constrains developers of closer-in subdivisions where public sewers are available. (JEL R52)

The Ethanol Decade: An Expansion of U.S. Corn Production, 2000-09

The recent 9-billion-gallon increase in corn-based ethanol production, which resulted from a combination of rising gasoline prices and a suite of Federal bioenergy policies, provides evidence of how farmers altered their land-use decisions in response to increased demand for corn. As some forecasts had suggested, corn acreage increased mostly on farms that previously specialized in soybeans. Other farms, however, offset this shift by expanding soybean production. Farm-level data reveal that the simultaneous net expansion of corn and soybean acreage resulted from a reduction in cotton acreage, a shift from uncultivated hay to cropland, and the expansion of double cropping (consecutively producing two crops of either like or unlike commodities on the same land within the same year).

Participation in Conservation Programs by Targeted Farmers: Beginning Limited-Resource, and Socially Disadvantaged Operators' Enrollment Trends

Beginning, limited-resource, and socially disadvantaged farmers make up as much as 40 percent of all U.S. farms. Some Federal conservation programs contain provisions that encourage participation by such “targeted” farmers and the 2008 Farm Act furthered these efforts. This report compares the natural resource characteristics, resource issues, and conservation treatment costs on farms operated by targeted farmers with those of other participants in the largest U.S. working-lands and land retirement conservation programs. Some evidence shows that targeted farmers tend to operate more environmentally sensitive land than other farmers, have different conservation priorities, and receive different levels of payments. Data limitations preclude a definitive analysis of whether efforts to improve participation by targeted farmers hinders or enhances the conservation programs’ ability to deliver environmental benefits cost effectively. But the different conservation priorities among types of farmers suggest that if a significantly larger proportion of targeted farmers participates in these programs, the programs’ economic and environmental outcomes could change.

Potential Farm-Level Effects of Eliminating Direct Payments

Since 2003, direct payments have accounted for a signifi cant portion of farm program payments. If direct payments were eliminated, many agricultural producers would be affected, both through the loss of income and potential declines in land values and rental rates. This report considers the potential contribution of direct payments to farm revenues and land values across farm commodities and regions and estimates the magnitude of the financial impact on participating farms should direct payments be eliminated. Direct payments are highest relative to crop revenues in parts of the Northern Plains, Southern Plains, Mountain, Delta, and Southeast regions, and the estimated effect of direct payments on cropland values also is relatively high in many of these regions. Overall, our analysis suggests that an abrupt end to the direct payment program could reduce the number of farms with a favorable financial status (profitable farms having relatively low debt burdens) by about 11,000 nationally, or about 2 percent of farms that received direct payments in 2009. The estimated effect varies regionally and is more pronounced in the Delta and Southeast regions, where direct payments per farm tend to be higher, on average, than elsewhere.

The Farm Act's Regional Equity Provision: Impacts on Conservation Program Outcomes

The 2002 and 2008 Farm Acts increased funding for conservation programs that provide financial assistance to farmers to implement conservation practices on working farmland. Along with seeking cost-effective environmental benefits, these programs have a goal of spreading conservation funding equitably across States. The 2002 and 2008 Farm Acts strengthened this allocative goal by setting a minimum threshold for conservation funding for each State—one that exceeds historical funding for some States—for enrolling agricultural producers in specified conservation programs. This study uses conservation program data to examine evidence of the impacts of the Regional Equity provision of the 2002 Farm Act, and explores the tradeoffs that can occur among conservation program goals when legislation gives primacy to fund allocation. The study found that cross-State shifts in funding reduced the acres receiving conservation treatment for many resource problems, but increased the net economic benefits from treatments on some of them. Overall impacts on the types of producers enrolled were small.

Integrating Commodity and Conservation Programs: Design Options and Outcomes

Can a single program support farm income and encourage producers to adopt environmentally sound farming practices? While simple in concept, attempting to roll the farm income support features of existing commodity programs and conservation payments into a single program raises questions. Exactly how would farm commodity and conservation payments be combined? What difference would it make for environmental gain and farm income support? This report approaches the questions in two ways. First, spending patterns in existing commodity and conservation programs are analyzed to determine the extent to which producers who are currently receiving commodity payments also receive conservation payments. Then, a number of hypothetical program scenarios are devised and analyzed to estimate how emphasis on current income support recipients would differ from a combined program that focuses on achieving cost-effective environmental gain. The results show that policymakers face significant tradeoffs between environmental conservation) objectives and farm income support objectives in designing a program that provides both income support and environmental gain.

Housing Market Bust and Farmland Values: Identifying the Changing Influence of Proximity to Urban Centers

This article estimates the impact of the 2007–2008 residential housing market bust on farmland values, using parcel-level farmland sales data from 2001–2010 for a 50-county region under urbanization pressure in western Ohio. Hedonic model estimates reveal that farmland was not immune to the residential housing bust; the portion of farmland value attributable to proximity to urban areas was almost cut in half shortly after the bust in 2009–2010. Nonetheless, total farmland prices remained relatively stable in the 2000s, likely due to increased demand for agricultural commodities. Our results are robust to different assumptions about the structure of the unobserved spatial correlation. (JEL Q15, R14)

Cash or Credit? Tax Credits and Conservation Outcomes

The use of tax policy to encourage conservation of agricultural and environmental resources is not a new idea but gained increased attention in the recently concluded farm bill debate. A new tax deduction is established for taxpayers who take voluntary measures to aid in the recovery of species that are either listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) or deemed by the Secretary of Interior or Commerce to be in need of protection under the ESA (“qualified species”). The farm bill also exempts retired and disabled individuals from self-employment taxes (the employer and employee shares of Social Security and Medicare taxes) on Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) payments. In addition, it extended for two years the special rule encouraging contributions of conservation easements. The Congressional Joint Tax Committee estimates that these three provisions, collectively, will reduce tax revenues by