Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T23:12:02.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Hard Truths About Agriculture and the Environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Erik Lichtenberg
Erik Lichtenberg*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maryland
Get access

Abstract

Environmental problems in agriculture have proven difficult to address due to the spatial heterogeneity and temporal variability intrinsic to agriculture. Agriculture is largely a struggle against nature; both its sustainability and the prospects for improving environmental performance and farm income simultaneously are thus inherently limited. Agriculture's high degree of variability makes direct regulation inefficient. Subsidies for improving environmental performance can have negative consequences and have proven ineffective in practice, due largely to bureaucratic culture. Pollution taxes should be the most effective and efficient form of policy. Interdisciplinary research is needed to provide models for performance evaluation.

Keywords

agricultureenvironmentfertilizerlivestock wastepesticidespollution
Type
Invited Papers
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , April 2004 , pp. 24 - 33
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 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

Babcock, B. A., Lakshminarayan, P. G., Wu, J.-J., and Zilberman, D. (1997). “Targeting Tools for the Purchase of Environmental Amenities.” Land Economics 73, 325–339.Google Scholar
Ball, V. E., Bureau, C., Nehring, R., and Somwaru, A. (1994). “Agricultural Productivity Revisited.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79, 1045–1063.Google Scholar
Bastos, G. S., and Lichtenberg, E. (2001). “Priorities in Cost Sharing for Soil and Water Conservation: A Revealed Preference Study.” Land Economics 77, 533–547.Google Scholar
Braden, J. B., Johnson, G. V., Bouzaher, A., and Miltz, D. (1989). “Optimal Spatial Management of Agricultural Pollution.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71, 404–413.Google Scholar
Caswell, M. F., and Zilberman, D. (1986). “The Effects of Well Depth and Land Quality on the Choice of Irrigation Technology.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 68, 798–811.Google Scholar
Feather, P., and Hellerstein, D. (1997). “Calibrating Benefit Function Transfer to Assess the Conservation Reserve Program.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79, 151–162.Google Scholar
Gardner, B. (2002). American Agriculture in the Twentieth Century: How It Flourished and What It Cost. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Huffman, W. E., and Evenson, R. E. (1993). Science for Agriculture: A Long-Term Perspective. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Lichtenberg, E. (1989). “Land Quality, Irrigation Development, and Cropping Patterns in the Northern High Plains.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71, 187–194.Google Scholar
Lichtenberg, E. (2002). “Agriculture and the Environment.” In Gardner, B. L. and Rausser, G. C. (eds.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics (pp. 1249–1313). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Lichtenberg, E., and Smith-Ramirez, R. (2003, July 28-30). “Cost Sharing, Transaction Costs, and Conservation” Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Agricultural Economics Association, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
Malik, A. S., and Shoemaker, R. A. (1993, June). “Optimal Cost-Sharing to Reduce Agricultural Pollution.” Technical Bulletin No. 1820, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
National Research Council. (1997). Precision Farming. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
National Research Council. Assessing the TMDL Approach to Water Quality Management. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001.Google Scholar
Olmstead, A. L., and Rhode, P. W. (2002). “The Red Queen and the Hard Reds: Productivity Growth in American Wheat, 1800-1940.” Journal of Economic History 62, 929–966.Google Scholar
Reichelderfer, K., and Boggess, W. G. (1988). “Government Decision Making and Program Performance: The Case of the Conservation Reserve Program.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 70, 1–11.Google Scholar
Ribaudo, M. O. (1989). “Targeting the Conservation Reserve Program to Maximize Water Quality Benefits.” Land Economics 65, 320–332.Google Scholar
Trimble, S. W. (1999). “Decreased Rates of Alluvial Sediment Storage in the Coon Creek Basin, Wisconsin, 1975-93.” Science 285, 1244–1246.Google Scholar
Trimble, S. W., and Crosson, P. (2000). “U.S. Soil Erosion Rates—Myth or Reality?” Science 289, 248–250.Google ScholarPubMed
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2000, December). “Summary Report: 1997 National Resources Inventory (revised).” USDA/Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1990). “National Survey of Pesticides in Drinking Water Wells, Phase I Report.” EPA Pub. No. 570/9-90-015, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
U.S. General Accounting Office. (2003, April 21). “Agricultural Conservation: USDA Needs to Better Ensure Protection of Highly Erodible Cropland and Wetlands” Pub. No. GAO-03-418, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Wu, J.-J., and Babcock, B. A. (1995). “Optimal Design of a Voluntary Green Payment Program Under Asymmetric Information.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 20, 316–327.Google Scholar
Wu, J.-J., and Babcock, B. A. (1996). “Contract Design for the Purchase of Environmental Goods from Agriculture.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 78, 935–945.Google Scholar