Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Enhancing Agriculture’s Potential to Sequester Carbon: A Framework to Estimate Incentive Levels for Reduced Tillage

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objectives of this study are to develop and test a framework to estimate the cost of enhancing agriculture’s potential as a carbon sink through the implementation of reduced tillage productive systems. A major factor inhibiting the adoption of reduced tillage practices is the additional risk perceived by farmers and its effect on net revenues. The expected utility model provides a useful means for evaluating risk–return tradeoffs of agricultural production systems. Incentive levels required to induce implementation of reduced tillage practices are calculated using estimated certainty equivalents. The framework developed is applied to eight case studies across the United States. Results indicate that in the Corn Belt, the required incentive payment for corn/soybeans would have to be $10.20 and $8.30 per acre for poorly drained and well-drained soils, respectively. Continuous corn incentive payments for poorly drained soils were found to be $40.40 and $26.70 for well-drained soils. In the central Great Plains, an incentive level of $14.60 per acre was required for continuous sorghum. Although the mean yields for conventional and reduced tillage practices are fairly close in this case, the higher costs associated with no-till sorghum result in the high incentive level. In the wheat/fallow and wheat/sorghum/fallow rotations of the western Great Plains, the yields associated with no-till were higher than intensive till. Thus, incentive levels near $6.00 per acre are the result of higher costs of no-till in these rotations. In the Mississippi River Corridor region, results show that the switch from corn/soybean to the same no-till rotation would require an incentive level of $7.90 per acre.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. D. M. Adams R. J. Alig B. A. McCarl J. M. Callaway S. M. Winnett (1999) ArticleTitleMinimum cost strategies for sequestering carbon in forests. Land Economics 75 360–374

    Google Scholar 

  2. R. M. Adams C. C. Chang B. A. McCarl J. M. Callaway (1992) The role of agriculture in climate change: A preliminary evaluation of emission control strategies. J. M. Reilly M. Anderson (Eds) Economics issues in global climate change: agriculture, forestry, and natural resources. Westview Press Boulder, Colorado 273–287

    Google Scholar 

  3. American Agricultural Economics Association (AAEA). 1998. Commodity costs and returns estimation handbook: A report of the AAEA task force on commodity costs and returns. AAEA, Ames, Iowa

  4. Bradley, J. F. 1995. Success with no-till cotton in Arkansas. Pages 46–48 in Agricultural Experiment Station special publication 160, University of Arkansas

  5. H. J. Brown (1989) ArticleTitleTillage system effects on crop growth and production costs for a corn–soybean rotation. Journal of Production Agriculture 2 273–279

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cochran, M. J. 1986. Stochastic dominance: The state of the art in agricultural economics. In Southern Regional Project S-180 Seminar Proceedings. Department of Agricultural Economics, Washington State University

  7. C. E. Dickey P. Jasa R. Grisso (1994) ArticleTitleLong term tillage effects on grain yield and soil properties in a soybean/grain sorghum rotation. Journal of Production Agriculture 7 465–470

    Google Scholar 

  8. J. H. Edwards D. L. Thurlow J. T. Eason (1988) ArticleTitleInfluence of tillage and crop rotation on yields of corn, soybean, and wheat. Agronomy Journal 80 76–80

    Google Scholar 

  9. R. J. Freund (1956) ArticleTitleIntroduction of risk into a programming model. Econometrica 24 257–263

    Google Scholar 

  10. P. Kauppi R. Sedjo (2001) Technological and economic potential of options to enhance, maintain, and manage biological carbon reservoirs and geo-engineering. . . (Eds) Climate change 2001: Mitigation. Cambridge University Press New York 303–341

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kurkalova, L., C. Kling, and J. Zhao. 2001. The subsidy for adopting conservation tillage: Estimation from observed behavior. Working Paper 01-WP 286, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University

  12. R. Lal J. M. Kimble R. F. Follett C. V. Cole (1999) U.S. cropland’s overall potential to mitigate the greenhouse effect. R Lal J. M. Kimble R. F. Follett C. V. Cole (Eds) The potential of U.S. cropland to sequester carbon and mitigate the greenhouse effect. Lewis Publishers Washington, DC 81–87

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lamond, R. E., G. M. Pierzynski, and D. A. Whitney, 2002. Long-term nitrogen management and tillage effects on grain sorghum. Working Paper. Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University

  14. J. A. Larson R. K. Roberts D. D. Tyler B. N. Duck S. P. Slinsky (1998) ArticleTitleNitrogen fixing winter cover crops and production risk: A case study for no tillage corn. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 30 163–174

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. A. Larson E. C. Jaenicke R. K. Roberts D. D. Tyler (2001) ArticleTitleRisk effects of alternative winter cover crop, tillage, and nitrogen fertilization systems in cotton production. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 33 445–457

    Google Scholar 

  16. B. A. McCarl (2001) ArticleTitleGreenhouse gas mitigation in U.S. agriculture and forestry. Science 294 2481–2482 Occurrence Handle10.1126/science.1064193 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38XntFem Occurrence Handle11752558

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. B. A. McCarl U. Schneider (2000) ArticleTitleU.S. agriculture’s role in a greenhouse gas emission mitigation world: An economic perspective. Review of Agricultural Economics 22 134–159 Occurrence Handle10.1111/1058-7195.t01-1-00011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. J. Meyer (2002) Expected utility model as a paradigm for decision making in agriculture. R. E. Just R. Pope (Eds) The role of risk in agriculture. Kluwer Academic Publishers Norwell, Massachusetts 3–20

    Google Scholar 

  19. C. A. Norwood A. J. Schlegel D. W. Morishita R. E. Gwin (1990) ArticleTitleCropping system and tillage effects on available soil, water and yield of grain sorghum and winter wheat. Journal of Production Agriculture 3 356–362

    Google Scholar 

  20. C. A. Norwood (1993) ArticleTitleAn economic comparison of the wheat fallow and wheat sorghum fallow cropping systems. Journal of Production Agriculture 6 261–266

    Google Scholar 

  21. P. J. Nowak P. F. Korsching (1985) ArticleTitleConservation tillage: Revolution or evolution? Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 40 199–201

    Google Scholar 

  22. Pecinovsky, K. 2002. Personal correspondance. North-East Research and Demo Farm

  23. T Prato (1990) ArticleTitleEconomic feasibility of conservation tillage with stochastic yields and erosion rates. North Central Journal of Agricultural Economics 12 333–334

    Google Scholar 

  24. Richardson, J. W. 2002. Simulation for applied risk management with and introduction to the software package SIMETAR©: Simulation for Excel to analyze risk. Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas A&M University

  25. L. J. Robison P. J. Barry (1987) The competitive firm’s response to risk. Macmillan Publishers New York

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sandretto, C. 2001. Conservation tillage firmly planted in U.S. agriculture. Agricultural Outlook. March. Economic Research Service, Washington, DC, 2 pp

  27. Schneider, U. A. 2000. Agricultural sector analysis on greenhouse gas emission mitigation in the U.S. Ph.D. Dissertation. Texas A & M University, College Station, TX

  28. West, T. D., J. Vyn, and G. C. Steinhardt. 2001. Long term tillage study. Pages 3–13 in Cropping systems research report 2001. Department of Agronomy, Purdue University

  29. T. O. West G. Marland (2002) ArticleTitleA synthesis of carbon emissions and net carbon flux in agriculture with emphasis on tillage practices in the United States. Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment 91 217–232

    Google Scholar 

  30. J. R. Williams (1988) ArticleTitleA stochastic dominance analysis of tillage and crop insurance practices in a semiarid region. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 70 112–120

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, The University of Tennessee, 310 Morgan Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996-4519, USA

    Daniel G. De La Torre Ugarte & Chad M. Hellwinckel

  2. Department of Agricultural Economics, The University of Tennessee, 302 Morgan Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996-4516, USA

    James A. Larson

Authors
  1. Daniel G. De La Torre Ugarte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chad M. Hellwinckel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James A. Larson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Torre Ugarte, D., Hellwinckel, C. & Larson, J. Enhancing Agriculture’s Potential to Sequester Carbon: A Framework to Estimate Incentive Levels for Reduced Tillage. Environmental Management 33 (Suppl 1), S229–S237 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-003-9133-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-003-9133-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation