(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)"> (This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)">
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agecon/v31y2004i2-3p277-284.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do counter-cyclical payments in the 2002 US Farm Act create incentives to produce?

Author

Listed:
  • Anton, Jesus
  • Mouel, Chantal Le
Abstract
Les résultats analytiques obtenus par certains auteurs, tels que Hennessy (1998) par exemple, suggèrent que des paiements contra-cycliques, même découplés en univers certain, génèrent des incitations à produire, via leurs effets sur le risque auquel font face les producteurs. L'article développe un cadre analytique permettant d'analyser les incitations à produire, liées à leurs effets sur le risque, de programmes tels que les paiements compensatoires au titre de prêts (LDP) et les paiements contra-cycliques (CCP) de la loi agricole américaine de 2002 (FSRI Act). L'effet des CCP en termes de réduction du risque auquel font face les producteurs est moindre que celui des LDP car les premiers sont versés sur la base de quantités produites fixes. Les LDP agissent directement sur la variance des distributions des prix aux producteurs tandis que les CCP jouent sur la covariance entre les distributions des paiements et les distributions des prix aux producteurs. La méthode proposée par Chavas et Holt (1990) est utilisée pour calculer la matrice de variance-covariance des distributions des prix aux producteurs, tronquées consécutivement à l'application de la loi agricole américaine de 2002. Puis les primes de risque sont calculées. Les résultats empiriques indiquent que les incitations à produire induites par les CCP, via leurs effets en termes de réduction du risque, sont non négligeables et qu'elles ne disparaissent pas lorsque les niveaux de production observés sont supérieurs aux niveaux de référence sur la base desquels ils sont versés.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Anton, Jesus & Mouel, Chantal Le, 2004. "Do counter-cyclical payments in the 2002 US Farm Act create incentives to produce?," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 31(2-3), pages 277-284, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agecon:v:31:y:2004:i:2-3:p:277-284
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169-5150(04)00103-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Atanu Saha & C. Richard Shumway & Hovav Talpaz, 1994. "Joint Estimation of Risk Preference Structure and Technology Using Expo-Power Utility," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(2), pages 173-184.
    2. Jean-Paul Chavas & Matthew T. Holt, 1990. "Acreage Decisions Under Risk: The Case of Corn and Soybeans," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(3), pages 529-538.
    3. Sergio H. Lence, 2000. "Using Consumption and Asset Return Data to Estimate Farmers' Time Preferences and Risk Attitudes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 934-947.
    4. Chavas, Jean-Paul & Holt, Matthew T, 1996. "Economic Behavior under Uncertainty: A Joint Analysis of Risk Preferences and Technology," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(2), pages 329-335, May.
    5. David A. Hennessy, 1998. "The Production Effects of Agricultural Income Support Policies under Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 46-57.
    6. Lence, Sergio H., 2000. "Using Consumption and Asset Return Data to Estimate Farmersï¾’ Time Preferences and Risk Attitudes," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1930, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. H. Alan Love & Steven T. Buccola, 1991. "Joint Risk Preference-Technology Estimation with a Primal System," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(3), pages 765-774.
    8. Barry T. Coyle, 1999. "Risk Aversion and Yield Uncertainty in Duality Models of Production: A Mean-Variance Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(3), pages 553-567.
    9. Barry T. Coyle, 1992. "Risk Aversion and Price Risk in Duality Models of Production: A Linear Mean-Variance Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(4), pages 849-859.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bhaskar, Arathi & Beghin, John C., 2009. "How Coupled Are Decoupled Farm Payments? A Review of the Evidence," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(1), pages 1-24, April.
    2. Urban, Kirsten & Jensen, Hans Grinsted & Brockmeier, Martina, 2012. "How Decoupled is the SFP in GTAP: Using a Sensitivity Analysis to Uncover the Degree of Coupling," Conference papers 332173, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    3. Cooper, Joseph, 2009. "Payments under the Average Crop Revenue Program: Implications for Government Costs and Producer Preferences," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(1), pages 49-64, April.
    4. Vincent H. Smith & Joseph W. Glauber, 2020. "Trade, policy, and food security," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 159-171, January.
    5. Fabienne Femenia & Alexandre Gohin & Alain Carpentier, 2010. "The Decoupling of Farm Programs: Revisiting the Wealth Effect," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(3), pages 836-848.
    6. O'Donoghue, Erik J. & Whitaker, James B., 2006. "How distorting are direct payments?," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21247, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Mary, Sebastien & Santini, Fabien & Boulanger, Pierre, 2013. "An Ex-Ante Assessment of CAP Income Stabilisation Payments using a Farm Household Model," 87th Annual Conference, April 8-10, 2013, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 158860, Agricultural Economics Society.
    8. Sharma, S.K., 2014. "Counter-Cyclical Payments under Doha Negotiations: An Analysis of Agricultural Subsidy Programme of the US," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 27(2).
    9. Cooper, Joseph C., 2009. "Economic Aspects of Revenue-Based Commodity Support," Economic Research Report 55838, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    10. Cooper, Joseph C., 2008. "A Revenue-Based Alternative to the Counter-Cyclical Payment Program," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6197, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Weerahewa, Jeevika & Meilke, Karl D. & Vyn, Richard J. & Haq, Zahoor Ul, 2008. "The Determinants of Farmland Values in Canada," Working Papers 43461, Canadian Agricultural Trade Policy Research Network.
    12. Bhaskar, Arathi & Beghin, John C., 2007. "How Coupled are Decoupled Farm Payments? A Review of Coupling Mechanisms and the Evidence," Working Papers 7347, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    13. Andreas Wagener & Juliane Zenker, 2021. "Decoupled but Not Neutral: The Effects of Counter‐Cyclical Cash Transfers on Investment and Incomes in Rural Thailand†," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(5), pages 1637-1660, October.
    14. Yinhao Wu & Enru Wang & Changhong Miao, 2019. "Fertilizer Use in China: The Role of Agricultural Support Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-23, August.
    15. Cooper, Joseph C., 2009. "ACRE: A Revenue-Based Alternative to Price-Based Commodity Payment Programs," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49180, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Glauber, Joseph W. & Effland, Anne, 2016. "United States agricultural policy: Its evolution and impact:," IFPRI discussion papers 1543, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    17. Anton, Jesus & Giner, Celine, 2005. "Can Risk Reducing Policies Reduce Farmer's Risk and Improve Their Welfare?," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24578, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Serra, Teresa & Goodwin, Barry K. & Featherstone, Allen M., 2011. "Risk behavior in the presence of government programs," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 162(1), pages 18-24, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anton, Jesus & Le Mouel, Chantal, 2003. "Do Counter-Cyclical Payments In The Fsri Act Create Incentives To Produce?," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25811, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Ahearn, Mary Clare & Collender, Robert N. & Diao, Xinshen & Harrington, David H. & Hoppe, Robert A. & Korb, Penelope J. & Makki, Shiva S. & Morehart, Mitchell J. & Roberts, Michael J. & Roe, Terry L. , 2004. "Decoupled Payments In A Changing Policy Setting," Agricultural Economic Reports 33981, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    3. Philippe Bontems & Celine Nauges, 2018. "Production choices with water markets and risk aversion: the role of initial allocations and forward trading," Post-Print hal-02349932, HAL.
    4. Pope, Rulon D. & LaFrance, Jeffrey T. & Just, Richard E., 2011. "Agricultural arbitrage and risk preferences," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 162(1), pages 35-43, May.
    5. Agabriel, Jacques & Lherm, Michel & Mosnier, Claire & Reynaud, Arnaud & Thomas, Alban, 2009. "Estimating a Production Function under Production and Output Price Risks: An Application to Beef Cattle in France," TSE Working Papers 09-046, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    6. Bontemps, Christophe & Bougherara, Douadia & Nauges, Céline, 2020. "Do Risk Preferences Really Matter? The Case of Pesticide Use in Agriculture," TSE Working Papers 20-1095, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    7. Jesus Anton & Chantal Le Mouël & . Unité d'Economie Et Sociologie Ruralestoulouse, 2002. "Risk effects of crop support measures [Effets liés au risque des mesures de soutien]," Post-Print hal-02830955, HAL.
    8. Viaggi, Davide & Raggi, Meri & Gomez y Paloma, Sergio, 2011. "Farm-household investment behaviour and the CAP decoupling: Methodological issues in assessing policy impacts," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 127-145, January.
    9. Robert G. Chambers & Margarita Genius & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2021. "Invariant Risk Preferences and Supply Response under Price Risk," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(5), pages 1802-1819, October.
    10. Kim, Tae-Hun, 2008. "The measurement of farmers' risk attitudes using a non-structural approach," Journal of Rural Development/Nongchon-Gyeongje, Korea Rural Economic Institute, vol. 31(2), pages 1-18, May.
    11. Mitchell, Paul David, 1999. "The theory and practice of green insurance: insurance to encourage the adoption of corn rootworm IPM," ISU General Staff Papers 1999010108000013154, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Mekbib G. Haile & Matthias Kalkuhl & Joachim Braun, 2014. "Inter- and intra-seasonal crop acreage response to international food prices and implications of volatility," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(6), pages 693-710, November.
    13. Teresa Serra & David Zilberman & José M. Gil, 2008. "Differential uncertainties and risk attitudes between conventional and organic producers: the case of Spanish arable crop farmers," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 39(2), pages 219-229, September.
    14. Haile, Mekbib G. & Kalkuhl, Matthias & von Braun, Joachim, 2013. "Short-term global crop acreage response to international food prices and implications of volatility," Discussion Papers 145308, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    15. Claassen, Roger & Carriazo, Fernando & Cooper, Joseph C. & Hellerstein, Daniel & Ueda, Kohei, 2011. "Grassland to Cropland Conversion in the Northern Plains: The Role of Crop Insurance, Commodity, and Disaster Programs," Economic Research Report 262239, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    16. Xavier Vollenweider & Salvatore Di Falco & Cathal O�Donoghue, 2011. "Risk preferences and voluntary agrienvironmental schemes: does risk aversion explain the uptake of the Rural Environment Protection Scheme?," GRI Working Papers 48, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    17. Liu, Yucan & Shumway, C. Richard, 2005. "Indirect Utility Maximization under Risk: A Heterogeneous Panel Application," 2005 Annual Meeting, July 6-8, 2005, San Francisco, California 36307, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    18. Haile, Mekbib G. & Kalkuhl, Matthias & Braun, Joachim von, 2013. "How does food supply respond to high and volatile international food prices? An empirical evaluation of inter- and intra- seasonal global crop acreage response," 2013 Fourth International Conference, September 22-25, 2013, Hammamet, Tunisia 161472, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    19. Sckokai, Paolo & Moro, Daniele, 2002. "Modelling The Cap Arable Crop Regime Under Uncertainty," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19860, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Lence, Sergio H., 2008. "How Much Can We Learn About Producers' Utility Functions from Their Production Data?," 2008 Agricultural and Rural Finance Markets in Transition, September 25-26, 2008, Kansas City, Missouri 119534, Regional Research Committee NC-1014: Agricultural and Rural Finance Markets in Transition.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agecon:v:31:y:2004:i:2-3:p:277-284. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/loi/agec .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.