Smart Planning in Iowa - A Guide to Principles, Strategies and Policy Tools

This guide was created to aid communities in the process of smart planning and is organized around the 10 Smart Planning Principles signed into Iowa law in 2010. A general description of the concept, strategies for encouraging use, policy tools for implementation, and a current Iowa example are presented for each Principle. In addition, a brief list of resources is provided to help local governments, community organizations and citizen planners find information and ideas on community involvement and incorporation of smart planning concepts in every day decisions.

Water planning law and government.

Water planning efforts typically identify problems and needs. But simply calling attention to issues is usually not enough to spur action; the end result of many well-intentioned planning efforts is a report that ends up gathering dust on a shelf. Vague recommendations like “Water conservation measures should be implemented” usually accomplish little by themselves as they don’t assign responsibility to anyone. Success is more likely when an implementation strategy — who can and should do what — is developed as part of the planning process. The more detailed and specific the implementation strategy, the greater the chance that something will actually be done. The question then becomes who has the legal authority or responsibility to do what? Are new laws and programs needed or can existing ones be used to implement the recommendations? ... This document is divided into four main parts. The first, “Carrots and Sticks” looks at two basic approaches — regulatory and non-regulatory — that can be, and are, used to carry out water policy. Both have advantages and disadvantages that need to be considered. The second, “The powers of federal, state and local governments…,” looks at the constitutional powers the federal government and state and local governments have to carry out water policy. An initial look at the U. S. Constitution might suggest the federal government’s regulatory authority over water is limited but, in fact, its powers are very substantial. States have considerable authority to do a number of things but have to be mindful of any federal efforts that might conflict with those state efforts. And local governments can only do those things the state constitution or state legislature says they can do and must conform to any requirements or limitations on those powers that are contained in the enabling acts. Parts three and four examine in more detail the main programs and agencies at the federal level as well as Iowa’s state and local levels and the roles they play in national and state water policy.

Dairy Food Consumption, Production, and Policy in Japan, August 2005

We explore and investigate Japanese dairy markets. We first provide an overview of consumer demand and how it evolved after World War II. Using historical data and econometric estimates of Japanese dairy demand, we identify economic, cultural, and demographic forces that have been shaping consumption patterns. Then we summarize the characteristics of Japanese milk production and dairy processing and policies affecting them. We next describe the import regime and trade flows in dairy products. The analysis of the regulatory system of the dairy sector shows how its incentive structure affects the long-term prospects of various segments of the industry. The paper concludes with policy recommendations of how to reform the Japanese dairy sector.

Collective Marketing Arrangements for Geographically Differentiated Agricultural Products: Welfare Impacts and Policy Implications, May 2006

This paper examines the incentive of atomistic agricultural producers within a specific geographical region to differentiate and collectively market products. We develop a model that allows us to analyze the market and welfare effects of the main types of real-world producer organizations, using it to derive economic insights regarding the circumstances under which these organizations will evolve, and describing implications of the results obtained in the context of an ongoing debate between the European Union and United States. As the anticipated fixed costs of development and marketing increase and the anticipated size of the market falls, it becomes essential to increase the ability of the producer organization to control supply in order to ensure the coverage of fixed costs. Whenever a collective organization allows a market (with a new product) to exist that otherwise would not have existed there is an increase in societal welfare. Counterintuitively, stronger property right protection for producer organizations may be welfare enhancing even after a differentiated product has been developed. The reason for this somewhat paradoxical result is that legislation aimed at curtailing the market power of producer organizations may induce large technological distortions.

Water Planning Law and Government, November 2008

Water planning efforts typically identify problems and needs. But simply calling attention to issues is usually not enough to spur action; the end result of many well-intentioned planning efforts is a report that ends up gathering dust on a shelf. Vague recommendations like “Water conservation measures should be implemented” usually accomplish little by themselves as they don’t assign responsibility to anyone. Success is more likely when an implementation strategy — who can and should do what — is developed as part of the planning process. The more detailed and specific the implementation strategy, the greater the chance that something will actually be done.

County condemnation manual : manual of practice and procedure for the acquisition of real property through the exercise of the power of eminent domain, 1995

This manual contains a summary of acquisition policy and makes recommendations to implement law and policy.

Report on a special investigation of the Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation at Iowa State University, for the period April 1, 2009 through December 15, 2015

Report on a special investigation of the Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation at Iowa State University, for the period April 1, 2009 through December 15, 2015