Farm-Level Analysis of Risk Management Proposals, March 2000

This paper presents a detailed report of the representative farm analysis (summarized in FAPRI Policy Working Paper #01-00). At the request of several members of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the U.S. Senate, we have continued to analyze the impacts of the Farmers’ Risk Management Act of 1999 (S. 1666) and the Risk Management for the 21st Century Act (S. 1580). Earlier analysis reported in FAPRI Policy Working Paper #04-99 concentrated on the aggregate net farm income and government outlay impacts. The representative farm analysis is conducted for several types of farms, including both irrigated and non-irrigated cotton farms in Tom Green County, Texas; dryland wheat farms in Morton County, North Dakota and Sumner County, Kansas; and a corn farm in Webster County, Iowa. We consider additional factors that may shed light on the differential impacts of the two plans. 1. Farm-level income impacts under alternative weather scenarios. 2. Additional indirect impacts, such as a change in ability to obtain financing. 3. Implications of within-year price shocks. Our results indicate that farmers who buy crop insurance will increase their coverage levels under S. 1580. Farmers with high yield risk find that the 65 percent coverage level maximizes expected returns, but some who feel that they obtain other benefits from higher coverage will find that the S. 1580 subsidy schedule significantly lowers the cost of obtaining the additional coverage. Farmers with lower yield risk find that the increased indemnities from additional coverage will more than offset the increase in producer premium. In addition, because S. 1580 extends its increased premium subsidy percentages to revenue insurance products, farmers will have an increased incentive to buy revenue insurance. Differences in the ancillary benefits from crop insurance under the baseline and S. 1580 would be driven by the increase in insurance participation and buy-up. Given the same levels of insurance participation and buy-up, the ancillary benefits under the two scenarios would be the same.

The Economics of Reducing the County Road System: Three Case Studies in Iowa, HR-242, 1986

This research project looked at the economic benefits and costs associated with alternative strategies for abandoning low volume rural highways and bridges. Three test counties in Iowa were studied, each 100 square miles in size: Hamilton County having a high agricultural tax base and a high percentage of paved roads and few bridges; Shelby County having a relatively low agricultural tax base, hilly terrain and a low percentage of paved road and many bridges; and Linn County having a high agricultural tax base, a high percentage of paved roads and a large number of non-farm households. A questionnaire survey was undertaken to develop estimates of farm and household travel patterns. Benefits and costs associated with the abandonment of various segments of rural highway and bridge mileages in each county were calculated. "Benefits" calculated were reduced future reconstruction and maintenance costs, whereas "costs" were the added cost of travel resulting from the reduced mileage. Some of the findings suggest limited cost savings from abandonment of county roads with no property access in areas with large non-farm rural population; relatively high cost savings from the abandonment of roads with no property access in areas with small rural population; and the largest savings from the conversion of public dead-end gravel roads with property or residence accesses to private drives.

Impact of Ownership Structure on the Performance of China’s Feed Mill Sector, April 2005

In the decade of the 1990s, China’s feed sector became increasingly privatized, more feed mills opened, and the scale of operation expanded. Capacity utilization remained low and multi-ministerial supervision was still prevalent, but the feed mill sector showed a positive performance overall, posting a growth rate of 11 percent per year. Profit margin over sales was within allowable rates set by the government of China at 3 to 5 percent. Financial efficiency improved, with a 20 percent quicker turnover of working capital. Average technical efficiency was 0.805, as more efficient feed mills increasingly gained production shares. This study finds evidence that the increasing privatization explains the improved performance of the commercial feed mill sector. The drivers that shaped the feed mill sector in the 1990s have changed with China’s accession to the World Trade Organization. With the new policy regime in place, the study foresees that, assuming an adequate supply of soy meal and an excess capacity in the feed mill sector, it is likely that China will allow corn imports up to the tariff rate quota (TRQ) of 7.2 mmt since the in-quota rate is very low at 1 percent. However, when the TRQ is exceeded, the import duty jumps to a prohibitive out-quota rate of 65 percent. With an import duty for meat of only 10 to 12 percent, China would have a strong incentive to import meat products directly rather than bringing in expensive corn to produce meat domestically. This would be further reinforced if structural transformation in the swine sector would narrow the cost differential between domestic and imported pork.

08027-016 Competine Creek Watershed Final Report

Competine Creek is an 8,653 acre subwatershed of Whitebreast Creek which drains directly to Lake Red Rock. The Marion Soil and Water Conservation District has prioritized water quality protection efforts within Competine Creek subwatershed because 1) this watershed has been identified as a significant contributor of sediment, nutrients, and bacteria to Competine Creek and Lake Red Rock, 2) the watershed provides unique outreach opportunities due to its unique rural and urban interface, and 3) by using a targeted approach to address water quality, the likelihood of successfully demonstrating water quality improvements is high due to its manageable size. The specific goals of this proposal to WIRB (Phase I) are to: 1) reduce sediment and nutrient delivery by 1787 tons and 2144 lbs by installing conservation practices on high priority agricultural land; and 2) install urban conservation practices that reduce the volume of peak flow, improve streambank stability, and promote infiltration of stormwater runoff before it enters Competine Creek. The Marion SWCD has assembled a unique group of partners and secured funding from multiple sources to implement this project.

Designation of Co-benefits and Its Implication for Policy: Water Quality versus Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Soils, March 2005

Designation of Co-benefits and Its Implication for Policy: Water Quality versus Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Soils, The

The Conservation Reserve Program in the Presence of a Working Land Alternative: Implications for Environmental Quality, Program Participation, and Income Transfer, August 2005

The United States has invested large sums of resources in multiple conservation programs for agriculture over the past century. In this paper we focus on the impacts of program interactions. Specifically, using an integrated economic and bio-physical modeling framework, we consider the impacts of the presence of working land programs on a land retirement for an important agricultural region—the Upper Mississippi River Basin (UMRB). Compared to a land retirement only program, we find that the presence of a working land program for conservation tillage results in significantly lower predicted signups for land retirement at a given rental rate. We also find that the presence of both a large working land and land retirement program can result in more environmental benefits and income transfers than a land retirement only program can achieve.

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.

Division of Soil Conservation Soil and Water Quality Review, October 2007

What is in this review produced by The Iowa Department of Agricultural and Land Stewardship: Special Points of Interest: • CREP wetlands remove 40-90% of the nitrate and 90+% of the herbicide in tile drainage water from upper- lying croplands. • The watershed approach is comprehensive, efficient and effective resource management. • The Mines & Minerals Bureau, through the AML Program, worked with various watershed groups to secure an additional $1 million dollars in funding for the construction on AML projects in Marion and Mahaska counties. • Iowa Learning Farm is Building a Culture of Conservation: Farmer to Farmer—Iowan to Iowan.