ABSTRACT:
Despite its widespread popularity, the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) bas been criticized for its cost ineffectiveness in achieving soil conservation goals. The objective of this study was to compare how the more targeted revision of the CRP in the 1990 Farm Bill compares with the 1985 Farm Bill CRP in concentrating enrollment in highly erodible western US. counties. Correlations between CRP enrollment and erodibility for counties in California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington show that the 1990 CRP has been more successful than the 1985 CRP in concentrating enrollment in erodible counties. Fixed bid caps in the 3985 CRP often directed enrollment to counties with lower productivity and modest erodibility, which reduced cost-effectiveness While the 1990 reforms appear to have improved the targeting of the CRF, the 1 million ha (2.5 million ac) 1990 CRP is small in terms of economic and environmental impact compared to the 14 million ha (34 million ac) 1985 CRP.
Footnotes
Douglas Young is professor and Amos Bechtel and Roger Coupal are graduate students in the Department of Agricultural Economics, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington 99164.
- Copyright 1994 by the Soil and Water Conservation Society
This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.