Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T07:11:31.491Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cost-Effectiveness of Nutrient Management and Buffers: Comparisons of Two Spatial Scenarios

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

John G. Bonham ,
Darrell J. Bosch  and
James W. Pease
John G. Bonham
Affiliation:
Asheville, NC
Darrell J. Bosch
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA
James W. Pease
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Farmers and taxpayers would benefit from more cost-effective agricultural nutrient pollution control measures. The objectives of our study are (1) to assess compliance costs and reductions in phosphorus loadings from implementation of nutrient management and riparian buffers; and (2) to estimate how the spatial scenario, which is the method of representing farms within the watershed, affects estimated compliance costs and reductions in phosphorus deliveries. Estimated compliance costs are quite sensitive to the spatial scenario. Buffers are more cost-effective than nutrient management under one of the two spatial scenarios, whereas nutrient management is more cost-effective under the other scenario. Shifts to more erosive crops reduce the effectiveness of both pollution control measures.

Keywords

compliance costsgeographic information systems (GIS)mathematical programmingnutrient managementphosphorus (P)pollution abatementriparian buffersspatial analysisQ12Q52
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 38 , Issue 1 , April 2006 , pp. 17 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2006

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

Aukland, L., Moura-Costa, P., and Brown, S.. “A Conceptual Framework for Addressing Leakage on Avoided Deforestation Projects.” Unpublished manuscript, Oxford, U.K., EcoSecurities Ltd., 2001.Google Scholar
Bonham, J. “Effects of Spatial Information on Estimated Farm Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Costs.” M.S. thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, July 2003.Google Scholar
Braden, J.B., Johnson, G.V., Bouzaher, A., and Miltz, D.. “Optimal Spatial Management of Agricultural Pollution.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71(1989):404-13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooke, A., Kendrick, D., Meeraus, A., and Raman, R.. GAMS: A User's Guide. Washington, DC: GAMS Development Corporation, 1998.Google Scholar
Carpentier, C.L., Bosch, D.J., and Batie, S.S.. “Using Spatial Information to Reduce Costs of Controlling Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 27(1998):72–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chesapeake Bay Program, Chesapeake 2000 Bay Agreement. Internet site: http://www.chesapeakebay.net/agreement.htm (Accessed April 6, 2005).Google Scholar
Chesapeake Bay Program, USEPA. Bay Trends and Indicators. Internet site: http://www.chesapeakebay.net/indicators.htm/ (Accessed July 12, 2004).Google Scholar
Chomitz, K.M. “Baseline, Leakage, and Measurement Issues: How Do Forestry and Energy Projects Compare?” Climate Policy 2(2002):35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Countryman, D.W., and Murrow, J.C.. “Economic Analysis of Contour Tree Buffer Strips Using Present Net Value.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 55(2000): 152-60.Google Scholar
Culver, T.B., Zhang, X., Naperala, T., Potts, A., Neeley, K., Yu, S., Gregory, R., Martin, C., Bodkin, R., Mizell, T., Lazarus, D., Bennett, M., Wade, C., and Schneider, J.. “Nitrate TMDL Development for Muddy Creek/Dry River, Virginia.” Unpublished manuscript, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, Richmond, April 2000.Google Scholar
Donohue, S.J., Simpson, T.W., Baker, J.C., Monnett, M.M., and Hawkins, G.W.. “Development and Implementation of The Virginia Agronomic Land Use Evaluation System (VALUES).” Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 25(1994): 1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, J.R., Hughes, D.W., and Butcher, W.R.. “Economic Modeling of Farm Production and Conservation Decisions in Response to Alternative Resource and Environmental Policies.” Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 20(1991):98–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feinerman, E., Bosch, D.J., and J.W Pease. “Manure Applications and Nutrient Standards.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86(2004): 14–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hochman, E., and Zilberman, D.. “Examination of Environmental Policies Using Production and Pollution Microparameter Distributions.” Econometrica 46(1978):739-60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hochman, E., and Zilberman, D.. “Two-Goal Environmental Policy: An Integration of Micro and Macro ad hoc Decision Rules.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 6(1979): 152-74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Just, R.E., and Antle, J.M.. “Interactions Between Agricultural and Environmental Policies: A Conceptual Framework.” American Economic Review 80(May 1990): 197–202.Google Scholar
Lynch, L., and Brown, C.. “Landowner Decision Making about Riparian Buffers.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 32(2000): 585-96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullins, G., Wolfe, M.L., Daniels, L., Zelazny, L., Beck, M., and Pease, J.. “The Virginia Phosphorous Index: A Planning Tool for Phosphorous Management.” Unpublished manuscript, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 2002a.Google Scholar
Mullins, G., Wolfe, M.L., Pease, J., Zelazny, L., Daniels, L., Beck, M., Brosius, M., Vincent, A., and Johns, D.. Virginia Phosphorous Index, Version 1.2: Technical Guide. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, 2002b. Internet site: http://p-index.agecon.vt.edu/ (Accessed January 29, 2006).Google Scholar
Nakao, M., and Sohngen, B.. “The Effect of Site Quality on the Costs of Reducing Soil Erosion with Riparian Buffers.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 55(2000):231-7.Google Scholar
National Research Council. Soil and Water Quality: An Agenda for Agriculture. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1993.Google Scholar
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). “NRCS Master List of Practice Costs.” Unpublished Budget Spreadsheet, Richmond, VA, 2001.Google Scholar
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Buffer Strips: Achieving Our Two Million Mile Goal. Internet site: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/feature/buffers/bufgoal.html (Accessed April 6, 2005).Google Scholar
Novotny, V, and Olem, H.. Water Quality: Prevention, Identification, and Management of Diffuse Pollution. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1994.Google Scholar
Opaluch, J.J., and Segerson, K.. “Aggregate Analysis of Site-Specific Pollution Problems: The Case of Groundwater Contamination from Agriculture.” Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 20(1991):83–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, R.L. “Financial Costs and Economic Tradeoffs of Alternative Manure Management Policies on Dairy and Dairy/Poultry Farms in Rockingham County, Virginia.” Ph.d. dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1995.Google Scholar
Pease, J., and Mullins, G.. “Virginia Manure Test Summaries.” Farm Business Management Update. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia Cooperative Extension. February 2001. Internet site: http://www.ext.vt.edu/news/periodicals/fmu/2001-02/manuretest.html (Accessed January 29, 2006).Google Scholar
Preckel, P.V., and Senatre, B.. “Incorporating Heterogeneity into Farm Policy Analysis: Does It Make a Difference?” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Agricultural Economics Association. Indianapolis, IN, August 1995.Google Scholar
Qiu, Z., and Prato, T.. “Economic Evaluation of Riparian Buffers in an Agricultural Watershed.” Journal of the American Water Resources Association 34(1998):877-90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qiu, Z., and Prato, T.. “Physical Determinants of Economic Value of Riparian Buffers in an Agricultural Watershed.” Journal of the American Water Resources Association 37(2000):295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwab, G.O., Fangmeir, D.D., Elliot, W.J., and Frevert, R.K.. Soil and Water Conservation Engineering, 4th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1993.Google Scholar
Schwabe, K.A. “Nonpoint Source Pollution, Uniform Control Strategies, and the Neuse River Basin.” Review of Agricultural Economics 23(2001):352-69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thiessen, A.H., and Alter, J.C.. “Climatological Data for July, 1911: District No. 10, Great Basin.” Monthly Weather Review (1911):1082-9.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). National Handbook of Conservation Practices. Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1998.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). SSURGO Documentation. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Internet site: http://gis.itc.nrcs.usda.gov/docs/SSURGO_Documentation.html (Accessed January 15, 2002).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1992 Census of Agriculture, Part 46, Virginia State and County Data. Bureau of the Census. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1994.Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. Office of Water. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1993.Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Clean Water Act. Laws and Regulations. Internet site: http://www.epa.gov/region5/water/cwa.htm (Accessed February 20, 2003).Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Unified National AFO Strategy Executive Summary. Internet site: http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/exexsum.pdf (Accessed April 6, 2005).Google Scholar
U.S. Soil Conservation Service. National Engineering Handbook. Hydrology, Section 4. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1972.Google Scholar
VanDyke, L.S., Pease, J.W., Bosch, D.J., and Baker, J.. “Nutrient Management Planning on Four Virginia Livestock Farms: Impacts on Net Income and Nutrient Losses.” J. Soil Water Conservation 54(1999):499–505.Google Scholar
Veith, T.L. “Agricultural BMP Placement For Cost-effective Pollution Control at the Watershed Level.” Ph.d. dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2002.Google Scholar
Virginia Agricultural Statistics Service. Virginia Agricultural Statistics Bulletin and Resource Directory 2002. Richmond, VA: Virginia Agricultural Statistics Service, Number 78, September 2003.Google Scholar
Virginia Cooperative Extension Service. Virginia Farm Management Crop and Livestock Enterprise Budgets. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Pubi. 446-047, 2001.Google Scholar
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. “Fecal Coliform TMDL Development for Muddy Creek, Virginia.” Unpublished manuscript, The Muddy Creek TMDL Establishment Workgroup. Richmond, VA: February 1999.Google Scholar
Wade, J., and Heady, E.. “Controlling Non-Point Sediment Sources With Cropland Management: A National Economic Assessment.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 59(1977): 13–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, J. “Slippage Effects of the Conservation Reserve Program.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 82(2000):979-92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, J., and Segerson, K.. “On the Use of Aggregate Data to Evaluate Groundwater Protection Policies.” Water Resources Research 31(1995): 1773-80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanosek, K.K. “Enhanced Biological Phosphorous Removal From Dairy Manure to Meet Nitrogen: Phosphorous Crop Nutrient Requirements.” MS thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2003.Google Scholar