Additionality and the adoption of farm conservation practices

Mariano Mezzatesta; David A. Newburn; Richard T. Woodward

doi:10.3368/le.89.4.722

Additionality and the adoption of farm conservation practices

Mariano Mezzatesta, David A. Newburn, Richard T. Woodward

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

66 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We use propensity score matching to estimate additionality from enrollment in federal costshare programs for six practices. We analyze farmer adoption decisions based on farmer survey data in Ohio. We develop a new methodological approach to decompose the average treatment effect on the treated according to relative contributions of voluntary adopters and new adopters. Our results indicate that cost-share programs achieve positive levels of additionality for each practice. But percent additionality varies dramatically between practices. Specifically, percent additionality is highest for hayfield establishment (93.3%), cover crops (90.6%), and filter strips (88.9%), while it is lowest for conservation tillage (19.3%). (JEL Q24, Q28).

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	722-742
Number of pages	21
Journal	Land Economics
Volume	89
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3368/le.89.4.722
Publication status	Published - 2013
Externally published	Yes

Access to Document

10.3368/le.89.4.722

Cite this

@article{a5aa064302dd462eb01098fdd10fbb88,

title = "Additionality and the adoption of farm conservation practices",

abstract = "We use propensity score matching to estimate additionality from enrollment in federal costshare programs for six practices. We analyze farmer adoption decisions based on farmer survey data in Ohio. We develop a new methodological approach to decompose the average treatment effect on the treated according to relative contributions of voluntary adopters and new adopters. Our results indicate that cost-share programs achieve positive levels of additionality for each practice. But percent additionality varies dramatically between practices. Specifically, percent additionality is highest for hayfield establishment (93.3%), cover crops (90.6%), and filter strips (88.9%), while it is lowest for conservation tillage (19.3%). (JEL Q24, Q28).",

author = "Mariano Mezzatesta and Newburn, {David A.} and Woodward, {Richard T.}",

year = "2013",

doi = "10.3368/le.89.4.722",

language = "English",

volume = "89",

pages = "722--742",

journal = "Land Economics",

issn = "0023-7639",

publisher = "University of Wisconsin Press",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Additionality and the adoption of farm conservation practices

AU - Mezzatesta, Mariano

AU - Newburn, David A.

AU - Woodward, Richard T.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - We use propensity score matching to estimate additionality from enrollment in federal costshare programs for six practices. We analyze farmer adoption decisions based on farmer survey data in Ohio. We develop a new methodological approach to decompose the average treatment effect on the treated according to relative contributions of voluntary adopters and new adopters. Our results indicate that cost-share programs achieve positive levels of additionality for each practice. But percent additionality varies dramatically between practices. Specifically, percent additionality is highest for hayfield establishment (93.3%), cover crops (90.6%), and filter strips (88.9%), while it is lowest for conservation tillage (19.3%). (JEL Q24, Q28).

AB - We use propensity score matching to estimate additionality from enrollment in federal costshare programs for six practices. We analyze farmer adoption decisions based on farmer survey data in Ohio. We develop a new methodological approach to decompose the average treatment effect on the treated according to relative contributions of voluntary adopters and new adopters. Our results indicate that cost-share programs achieve positive levels of additionality for each practice. But percent additionality varies dramatically between practices. Specifically, percent additionality is highest for hayfield establishment (93.3%), cover crops (90.6%), and filter strips (88.9%), while it is lowest for conservation tillage (19.3%). (JEL Q24, Q28).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84886885376&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3368/le.89.4.722

DO - 10.3368/le.89.4.722

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84886885376

SN - 0023-7639

VL - 89

SP - 722

EP - 742

JO - Land Economics

JF - Land Economics

IS - 4

ER -

Additionality and the adoption of farm conservation practices

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this