Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T13:17:56.078Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Creating positive incentives for farm composting

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

Richard M. Kashmanian
Affiliation:
Senior Economist, Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460
Robert F. Rynk
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844.
Get access

Abstract

With the growing concern about the impact of agriculture on water quality and heightened interest in managing agricultural by-products economically, the use of composting by U.S. farmers is increasing. Over 8,000 farms are now composting animal mortalities, manure, crop residues, and selected organic materials from communities and industries. At least 75% of farm composting operations are composting poultry mortalities. Based on discussions with contacts in leading agricultural states and organizations, this paper provides examples of technical and economic incentive programs encouraging farmers to adopt composting as a way to manage farm by-products. These programs have been established largely by the public sector, including state agencies, public universities, USDA, and USEPA. However, they are often initiated by or conducted in partnership with the private sector entities such as farms, livestock and poultry product companies, and composting businesses. Examples of incentive programs include research and demonstration projects, extension educational programs, technical standards, regulatory incentives, cost-sharing, financial grants, and low-interest loans. Many projects have succeeded in expanding the practice of composting among farms. For example, the now common practice of composting poultry mortalities can be traced to research and educational programs at the Universities of Maryland and Delaware, which were followed by a national technical standard adopted by the USDA. Similar success stories are apparent in other composting incentive programs, such as for composting of swine mortalities in Missouri, dairy manure in Michigan, and non-farm materials in California and Pennsylvania.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

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

1.Fulhage, C., and Ellis, C.. 1994. Composting dead swine. WQ 225. University Extension, Univ. of Missouri, Columbia.Google Scholar
2.Kashmanian, R.M. 1994. Building support for composting in agriculture. BioCycle 35(12):6770.Google Scholar
3.Kashmanian, R.M. 1995. Poultry industry finds added value in composting. BioCycle 36(1):5557.Google Scholar
4.Kashmanian, R.M., and Rynk, R.F.. 1996. Agricultural composting in the United States: Trends and driving forces. J. Soil and Water Conservation 51:194201.Google Scholar
5.Poultry Water Quality Consortium. 1997. Memorandum.Google Scholar
6.Rynk, R. 1994. Almost mainstream? A progress report on dairy manure composting. Proc. Third International Dairy Housing Conference. Amer. Soc. Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, Michigan.Google Scholar