Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-495rp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-12T16:43:32.210Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Groundwater Protection Policy and Agricultural Production: A Recursive Stochastic Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Brian P. Baker
Brian P. Baker*
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
Get access

Abstract

Contamination of groundwater by agricultural practices presents a dilemma between protecting a vital resource and maintaining a valuable part of the economy. Policies to balance these objectives are presented. In addition to an historical baseline, policies that ban certain pesticides, taxes and subsidies, and control cultural practices are also considered. A model is developed to reflect the current state of agriculture in Eastern Suffolk County. This model consists of a recursive programming component, which has input for it generated by a stochastic model of Colorado potato beetle pest dynamics and management strategies to control those pests. While income is reduced by banning pesticides, the reduction is small when compared with the improvement in environmental quality. Further efforts to reduce pesticide use resulted in a reduction in potato acreage and incomes, as well as yields. Analysis concludes that improvements in both farm income and environmental quality could be achieved through the adoption of subsidies for low-input conservation crops.

Type
Articles
Information
Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , October 1988 , pp. 131 - 138
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 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.)

Footnotes

The author wishes to acknowledge the help of David Allee, Richard Boisvert, Peter Berck, and David Zilberman. Much of the work was done while a graduate student at Cornell University.

References

Baier, J. H. and Robbins, S. F. “Report of the Occurrence and Movement of Agricultural Chemicals in Groundwater (2 volumes).” Hauppauge, NY: Suffolk County Department of Health Services. 1982.Google Scholar
Baumol, William J. and Oates, Wallace E. The Theory of Environmental Policy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 1975.Google Scholar
Carlson, Gerald A. “Economic Incentives for Pesticide Pollution Control” in Stephenson, J. (ed.) The Practical Application of Economic Incentives to the Control of Pollution. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. 1974.Google Scholar
Day, Richard H. “Adaptive Economics and Natural Resources Policy.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 60 (1978):276–283.Google Scholar
Fairchild, D. M. “A National Assessment of Ground Water Contamination from Pesticides and Fertilizers” in Fairchild, (ed.) Ground Water Quality and Agricultural Practices. Ann Arbor, MI: Lewis Publishers. 1987.Google Scholar
Hochman, E., Zilberman, D. and Just, R. E. “Two Goal Regional Environmental Policy: The Case of the Santa Ana River Basin.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 4 (1977):25–39.Google Scholar
Laskowski, Dennis A., Goring, Cleve A. I., McCall, P. J., and Swann, R. L. “Terrestrial Environment” in Conway, R. E. (ed.) Environmental Risk Analysis for Chemicals. New York: Van Nostrand. 1982.Google Scholar
Lazarus, S. S. and White, G. B. “The Economic Potential of Crop Rotations in Long Island Potato Production.” A.E. Res. 83-20, Department of Agricultural Economics, Cornell University. 1983.Google Scholar
Lazarus, S. S. and White, G. B. “Economic Impact of Introducing Rotations on Long Island Potato Farms,” Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 13 (1984):221–228.Google Scholar
Lipsey, R. and Lancaster, K. “The General Theory of Second Best.” Review of Economic Studies 24 (1957):11–33.Google Scholar
Logan, P. A. “Estimating and Predicting Colorado Potato Beetle Density and Potato Yield Loss” in Lashomb, and Casagrande, (eds.) Advances in Potato Pest Management. Stroudsburg, PA: Hutchinson Ross Publishing Co. 1981.Google Scholar
Milon, J. W. “Interdependent Risk and Institutional Coordination for Nonpoint Externalities in Groundwater.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 68 (1986):1229–1233.Google Scholar
Nielsen, E. G. and Lee, L. K. “The Magnitude and Costs of Groundwater Contamination from Agricultural Chemicals: A National Perspective.” Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. 1987.Google Scholar
New York Crop Reporting Service. New York Agricultural Statistics. Albany, NY: New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, (various years).Google Scholar
Phelps, J. B. and How, R. B. “Planning Data for Small Scale Commercial Vegetable and Strawberry Production in New York,” A.E. Res. 81-20, Department of Agricultural Economics, Cornell University. 1981.Google Scholar
Sanok, W. Personal Communication. 1984.Google Scholar
Snyder, D. P “Farm Cost Accounts.” A.E. Res. 83-41, Department of Agricultural Economics, Cornell University. 1983.Google Scholar
Wright, R. J., Loria, R., Sieczka, J. B. and Moyer, D. D. “Final Report of the 1983 Long Island Potato Integrated Pest Management Program.” Mimeo 306, Department of Vegetable Crops, Cornell University (1984).Google Scholar