Row Crop Response to Topsoil Restored on Borrow Areas, HR-186, Supplemental Report, 1982

Borrow areas are created where soil is needed to provide fill for construction projects. This research evaluated (1) the changes in row crop productivity resulting from removal of soil for highway construction in Iowa and (2) restoration methods which included: depth of topsoil, subsoil tillage, manure application, and two years of legume growth prior to row cropping. The research was carried out from 1977-1981 at four locations. Corn and soybean y1elds from borrow areas have been below, equal to; and greater than yields from undisturbed, neighboring farmland. Little or no yield increase was noted from restored topsoil at coarse textured sites. At finer textured sites, a marked yield increase of both crops occurred after the addition of 6 inches of topsoil but little added yield increase resulted from restoring 12 inches of topsoil. Subsoil tillage has shown little or no beneficial effect on crop yields. The manure treatment has resulted in a corn yield increase but only in the first year after application.

Row Crop Response to Topsoil Restored on Borrow Areas, HR-186, 1982

Borrow areas are created where soil is needed to provide fill for construction projects. The changes in row-crop productivity resulting from removal of soil for highway construction in Iowa and restoration methods, which included addition to topsoil, subsoil tillage, manure application, and 2 yr of legume growth before row cropping, were evaluated. The research was carried out from 1977 to 1981 at four locations. Corn and soybean yields from borrow areas have been below, equal to, and greater than yields from undisturbed neighboring farmland. Little or no yield increase was noted from restored topsoil at coarse-textured sites. At finer-textured sites, a marked yield increase of both crops occurred after the addition of 6 in. of topsoil but little added yield increase resulted from restoring 12 in. of topsoil. Subsoil tillage has shown little or no beneficial effect on crop yields. The manure treatment has resulted in a corn yield increase but only in the first year after application.

Asset Management Program Enhancement Plan: Baseline Assessment Phases I and II, 2015

This project resulted in the development of a framework for making asset management decisions on low-volume bridges. The research focused on low-volume bridges located in the agricultural counties of Iowa because recent research has shown that these counties have the greatest percentage of structurally deficient bridges in the nation. Many of the same counties also have the highest crop yields in the state, creating a situation where detours caused by deficient bridges on farm-to-market roads increase the cost to transport the crops. Thus, the research proposed the use of social return on investment (SROI), a tool used by international institutions such as the World Bank, as an asset management metric to gauge to the socioeconomic impact of structurally deficient bridges on the state in an effort to provide quantified justification to fund improvements on low-volume assets such as these rural bridges. The study found that combining SROI with current asset management metrics like average daily traffic (ADT) made it possible to prioritize the bridges in such a way that the limited resources available are allocated in a manner that promotes a more equitable distribution and that directly benefits the user, in this case Iowa farmers. The result is a system that more closely aligns itself with the spirit of MAP-21, in that infrastructure investments are used to facilitate economic growth for Iowa’s agricultural economy.

Get a GRIP: Should Area Revenue Coverage Be Offered through the Farm Bill or as a Crop Insurance Program? 2007

The successful expansion of the U.S. crop insurance program has not eliminated ad hoc disaster assistance. An alternative currently being explored by members of Congress and others in preparation of the 2007 farm bill is to simply remove the “ad hoc” part of disaster assistance programs by creating a standing program that would automatically funnel aid to hard-hit regions and crops. One form such a program could take can be found in the area yield and area revenue insurance programs currently offered by the U.S. crop insurance program. The Group Risk Plan (GRP) and Group Risk Income Protection (GRIP) programs automatically trigger payments when county yields or revenues, respectively, fall below a producer-elected coverage level. The per-acre taxpayer costs of offering GRIP in Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa for corn and soybeans through the crop insurance program are estimated. These results are used to determine the amount of area revenue coverage that could be offered to farmers as part of a standing farm bill disaster program. Approximately 55% of taxpayer support for GRIP flows to the crop insurance industry. A significant portion of this support comes in the form of net underwriting gains. The expected rate of return on money put at risk by private crop insurance companies under the current Standard Reinsurance Agreement is approximately 100%. Taking this industry support and adding in the taxpayer support for GRIP that flows to producers would fund a county target revenue program at the 93% coverage level.

Strip Tillage Effects on Crop Production and Soil Erosion, 2002

Report produced by Iowa Departmment of Agriculture and Land Stewardship

Influence of the Premium Subsidy on Farmers’ Crop Insurance Coverage Decisions, April 2005

The Agricultural Risk Protection Act greatly increased the expected marginal net benefit of farmers buying high-coverage crop insurance policies by coupling premium subsidies to coverage level. This policy change, combined with cross-sectional variations in expected marginal net benefits of high-coverage policies, is used to estimate the role that premium subsidies play in farmers’ crop insurance decisions. We use county data for corn, soybeans, and wheat to estimate regression equations that are then used to obtain insight into two policy scenarios. We first estimate that eventual adoption of actuarially fair incremental premiums, combined with current coupled subsidies, would increase farmers’ purchase of high-coverage policies by almost 400 percent from 1998 levels across the three crops and two plans of insurance included in the analysis. We then estimate that a return to decoupled subsidies would decrease farmers’ high-coverage purchase decisions by an average of 36 percent.

How Much “Safety” Is Available under the U.S. Proposal to the WTO?, November 2005

Critics of the U.S. proposal to the World Trade Organization (WTO) made in October 2005 are correct when they argue that adoption of the proposal would significantly reduce available support under the current farm program structure. Using historical prices and yields from 1980 to 2004, we estimate that loan rates would have to drop by 9 percent and target prices would have to drop by 10 percent in order to meet the proposed aggregate Amber Box and Blue Box limits. While this finding should cheer those who think that reform of U.S. farm programs is long overdue, it alarms those who want to maintain a strong safety net for U.S. agriculture. The dilemma of needing to reform farm programs while maintaining a strong safety net could be resolved by redesigning programs so that they target revenue rather than price. Building on a base of 70 percent Green Box income insurance, a program that provides a crop-specific revenue guarantee equal to 98 percent of the product of the current effective target price and expected county yield would fit into the proposed aggregate Amber and Blue Box limits. Payments would be triggered whenever the product of the season-average price and county average yield fell below this 98 percent revenue guarantee. Adding the proposed crop-specific constraints lowers the coverage level to 95 percent. Moving from programs that target price to ones that target revenue would eliminate the rationale for ad hoc disaster payments. Program payments would automatically arrive whenever significant crop losses or economic losses caused by low prices occurred. Also, much of the need for the complicated mechanism (the Standard Reinsurance Agreement) that transfers most risk of the U.S. crop insurance to the federal government would be eliminated because the federal government would directly assume the risk through farm programs. Changing the focus of federal farm programs from price targeting to revenue targeting would not be easy. Farmers have long relied on price supports and the knowledge that crop losses are often adequately covered by heavily subsidized crop insurance or by ad hoc disaster payments. Farmers and their leaders would only be willing to support a change to revenue targeting if they see that the current system is untenable in an era of tight federal budgets and WTO limits.

Concepts and Rationale for Regional Nitrogen Rate Guidelines for Corn, April 2006

Nitrogen (N) is typically one of the largest corn fertilization expenses. Nitrogen application is critical because it signifi cantly improves corn yield in many crop rotations. When choosing N rates, producers need to carefully consider both achieving most profi table economic return and advancing environmental stewardship. In 2004, university agronomists from the Corn Belt states began discussions regarding N rate use for corn production. The reasons for the discussions centered on apparent differences in methods for determining N rates across states, misperceptions regarding N rate guidelines, and concerns about application rates as corn yields have climbed to historic levels. An outcome of those discussions was an effort with the objectives to: ▪ develop N rate guidelines that could be applicable on a regional basis and ▪ identify the most profi table fertilizer N rates for corn production across the Corn Belt. This publication provides an overview of corn N fertilization in regard to rate of application, investigates concepts for determining economic application rates, and describes a suggested regional approach for developing corn N rate guidelines directly from recent research data.

Woodland Improvement and Crop Trees in Iowa, 2005

Vigorous and Healthy woodlands in Iowa have the unique distinction of being able to provide a wealth of benefits for the landowner and residents of the state. Benefits from a healthy forest include timber and wood resources, watershed protection, fragile site protection, wildlife and bird habitat, aesthetics and beauty, and recreational opportunities.

An Analysis of the Link between Ethanol, Energy, and Crop Markets, November 2006

This study analyzes the impact of price shocks in three input and output markets critical to ethanol: gasoline, corn, and sugar. We investigate the impact of these shocks on ethanol and related agricultural markets in the United States and Brazil. We find that the composition of a country’s vehicle fleet determines the direction of the response of ethanol consumption to changes in the gasoline price. We also find that a change in feedstock costs affects the profitability of ethanol producers and the domestic ethanol price. In Brazil, where two commodities compete for sugarcane, changes in the sugar market affect the competing ethanol market.

Intellectual Property Rights and Crop-Improving R&D under Adaptive Destruction, June 2007

This paper studies how the strength of intellectual property rights (IPRs) affects investments in biological innovations when the value of an innovation is stochastically reduced to zero because of the evolution of pest resistance. We frame the problem as a research and development (R&D) investment game in a duopoly model of sequential innovation. We characterize the incentives to invest in R&D under two competing IPR regimes, which differ in their treatment of the follow-on innovations that become necessary because of pest adaptation. Depending on the magnitude of the R&D cost, ex ante firms might prefer an intellectual property regime with or without a “research exemption” provision. The study of the welfare function that also accounts for benefit spillovers to consumers—which is possible analytically under some parametric conditions, and numerically otherwise—shows that the ranking of the two IPR regimes depends critically on the extent of the R&D cost.

Impact of High Crop Prices on Environmental Quality: A Case of Iowa and the Conservation Reserve Program, 2007

Growing demand for corn due to the expansion of ethanol has increased concerns that environmentally sensitive lands retired from agricultural production into the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) will be cropped again. Iowa produces more ethanol than any other state in the United States, and it also produces the most corn. Thus, an examination of the impacts of higher crop prices on CRP land in Iowa can give insight into what we might expect nationally in the years ahead if crop prices remain high. We construct CRP land supply curves for various corn prices and then estimate the environmental impacts of cropping CRP land through the Environmental Policy Integrated Climate (EPIC) model. EPIC provides edge-of-field estimates of soil erosion, nutrient loss, and carbon sequestration. We find that incremental impacts increase dramatically as higher corn prices bring into production more and more environmentally fragile land. Maintaining current levels of environmental quality will require substantially higher spending levels. Even allowing for the cost savings that would accrue as CRP land leaves the program, a change in targeting strategies will likely be required to ensure that the most sensitive land does not leave the program.

Iowa Crop and Weather Report, August 3, 2009

Report produced by the The Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, Climatology Bureau. Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey today commented on the Iowa Crops and Weather report released by the USDA National Agricultural Statistical Service. The report is released weekly from April through October.

Iowa Crop and Weather Report, January 3, 2012, Vol. 12. no. 1

Report produced by the The Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, Climatology Bureau. Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey today commented on the Iowa Crops and Weather report released by the USDA National Agricultural Statistical Service. The report is released weekly from April through October.

Iowa Crop and Weather Report, November 27, 2011, Vol. 11. no. 39

Report produced by the The Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, Climatology Bureau. Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey today commented on the Iowa Crops and Weather report released by the USDA National Agricultural Statistical Service. The report is released weekly from April through October.