Item Details

Balancing the Multiple Objectives of Conservation Programs

Andrea Cattaneo ... [et al.]
Format
EBook; Book; Government Document; Online
Published
Washington, D.C. : U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, [2006]
Language
English
Series
Economic Research Report
Economic Research Report (United States. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service)
SuDoc Number
A 93.73:19
Abstract
Many of the Nation's conservation programs seek to achieve multiple environmental objectives. Implementing a multi-objective program efficiently requires program managers to balance different environmental and cost objectives. A number of conservation programs use an index approach to prioritize objectives and rank program applications. This approach keeps program objectives distinct and enables program managers to use weights to determine the relative importance of each objective. This report provides empirical evidence on the environmental and cost tradeoffs of different index weighting schemes in USDA's Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The analyses take into account both land characteristics and how changes to an index affect producer decisions to voluntarily apply. While small changes in index weights do not markedly affect the outcomes of the CRP, larger changes can have a moderate effect. Opportunities for obtaining multiple environmental benefits simultaneously by increasing the index weight on one objective appear limited, and increasing an objective's index weight by at least 20 percent can trigger losses of benefits related to other objectives. Weight changes in smaller incremental program enrollments also result in more tradeoffs than in very large program enrollments.
Description
vi, 58 p. : ill., maps (some col.) ; 28 cm.
Notes
  • "May 2006."
  • "Electronic report."--Cover.
  • Also available on the World Wide Web.
  • Includes bibliographical references (p. 36-38).
Series Statement
Economic research report ; no. 19
Economic research report (United States. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service) no. 19
Logo for Copyright Not EvaluatedCopyright Not Evaluated
Technical Details
  • Access in Virgo Classic

  • LEADER 03250nam a2200457Ia 4500
    001 u4636297
    003 SIRSI
    005 20061128115424.0
    008 060605s2006 dcuab b f000 0 eng d
    035
      
      
    a| (OCoLC)70077160
    040
      
      
    a| MNU c| MNU d| ORE d| GPO d| MvI
    043
      
      
    a| n-us---
    049
      
      
    a| VA@D
    086
    0
      
    a| A 93.73:19
    090
      
      
    a| HD1401 b| .E26 no.19
    245
    0
    0
    a| Balancing the multiple objectives of conservation programs / c| Andrea Cattaneo ... [et al.].
    260
      
      
    a| Washington, D.C. : b| U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, c| [2006]
    300
      
      
    a| vi, 58 p. : b| ill., maps (some col.) ; c| 28 cm.
    490
    1
      
    a| Economic research report ; v| no. 19
    500
      
      
    a| "May 2006."
    500
      
      
    a| "Electronic report."--Cover.
    500
      
      
    a| Also available on the World Wide Web.
    504
      
      
    a| Includes bibliographical references (p. 36-38).
    520
    3
      
    a| Many of the Nation's conservation programs seek to achieve multiple environmental objectives. Implementing a multi-objective program efficiently requires program managers to balance different environmental and cost objectives. A number of conservation programs use an index approach to prioritize objectives and rank program applications. This approach keeps program objectives distinct and enables program managers to use weights to determine the relative importance of each objective. This report provides empirical evidence on the environmental and cost tradeoffs of different index weighting schemes in USDA's Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The analyses take into account both land characteristics and how changes to an index affect producer decisions to voluntarily apply. While small changes in index weights do not markedly affect the outcomes of the CRP, larger changes can have a moderate effect. Opportunities for obtaining multiple environmental benefits simultaneously by increasing the index weight on one objective appear limited, and increasing an objective's index weight by at least 20 percent can trigger losses of benefits related to other objectives. Weight changes in smaller incremental program enrollments also result in more tradeoffs than in very large program enrollments.
    596
      
      
    a| 2
    610
    2
    0
    a| Conservation Reserve Program (U.S.)
    650
      
    0
    a| Agriculture x| Environmental aspects z| United States.
    650
      
    0
    a| Environmental policy z| United States x| Decision making.
    650
      
    0
    a| Agriculture and state z| United States.
    650
      
    0
    a| Conservation of natural resources x| Economic aspects z| United States.
    650
      
    0
    a| Land use, Rural z| United States.
    650
      
    0
    a| Agricultural conservation z| United States.
    650
      
    0
    a| Conservation projects (Natural resources) z| United States.
    700
    1
      
    a| Cattaneo, Andrea.
    776
    1
      
    t| Balancing the multiple objectives of conservation programs h| vi, 58 p. w| (OCoLC)76811614
    830
      
    0
    a| Economic research report (United States. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service) v| no. 19.
    856
    4
    1
    u| http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ERR19/ERR19.pdf z| Connect to this title online
    710
    1
      
    a| United States. b| Department of Agriculture. b| Economic Research Service
    999
      
      
    a| A 93.73:19 w| SUDOC i| 4636297-1001 l| DOC-US m| ALDERMAN t| DOCUMENT

Availability

Google Preview

Library Location Map Availability Call Number
Alderman US Documents (3 New) Map Available