Priorities in cost sharing for soil and water conservation: a revealed preference study.
A number of studies have questioned how successfully paid land diversion has been adapted to address broad environmental policy concerns. Similar evaluations of cost-sharing programs have not been performed. This paper uses a revealed preference approach to estimate the implicit decision criteria us...
| Publicado en: | Land Economics Vol. 77; no. 4; pp. 533 - 548 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
University of Wisconsin Press
November 2001
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=510202589&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 510202589 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00237639 LAE jtl: Land Economics issn: 00237639 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: November 2001 vid: 77 iid: 4 pid: 249 pub: University of Wisconsin Press artinfo: ui: 510202589 10.2307/3146939 ppf: 533 ppct: 15 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 1.2MB tig: atl: Priorities in cost sharing for soil and water conservation: a revealed preference study. aug: au: Bastos, Guilherme S. Lichtenberg, Erik su: Nonpoint source pollution Agricultural ecology Maryland sug: subj: Maryland Nonpoint source pollution Agricultural ecology keyword: Soil conservation -- Federal aid Water conservation -- Maryland ab: A number of studies have questioned how successfully paid land diversion has been adapted to address broad environmental policy concerns. Similar evaluations of cost-sharing programs have not been performed. This paper uses a revealed preference approach to estimate the implicit decision criteria used to allocate federal cost-sharing funds in Maryland, during the fiscal years 1994 through 1996. Funds appear to have been awarded preferentially to projects that enhanced agricultural productivity and farm profitability. In contrast to findings regarding the CRP, however, our results do not indicate that cost share awards in Maryland were inconsistent with stated environmental quality priorities. (JEL Q24, Q25) Reprinted by permission of the publisher. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|