MARC

Tag First Indicator Second Indicator Subfields
LEADER 00000cam a2200000Ia 4500
001 in00002364521
005 20151109040710.0
008 071105s2007 dcuab b f000 0 eng d
035 |a (OCoLC)ocn181091727 
040 |a MNU  |c MNU  |d ORE  |d MTG  |d TXA  |d UtOrBLW 
043 |a n-us--- 
049 |a TXAM 
086 0 |a A 93.73:44 
090 |a HD1401  |b .E26 no.44 
100 1 |a Claassen, Roger L. 
245 1 0 |a Integrating commodity and conservation programs :  |b design options and outcomes /  |c Roger Claassen, Marcel Aillery, Cynthia Nickerson. 
264 1 |a Washington, D.C. :  |b U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Economic Research Service,  |c [2007] 
300 |a v, 54 pages :  |b illustrations, map (some color) ;  |c 28 cm. 
336 |a text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a unmediated  |b n  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a volume  |b nc  |2 rdacarrier 
490 1 |a Economic research report ;  |v no. 44 
500 |a "October 2007." 
520 3 |a Can a single program support farm income and encourage producers to adopt environmentally sound farming practices? While simple in concept, attempting to roll the farm income support features of existing commodity programs and conservation payments into a single program raises questions. Exactly how would farm commodity and conservation payments be combined? What difference would it make for environmental gain and farm income support? This report approaches the questions in two ways. First, spending patterns in existing commodity and conservation programs are analyzed to determine the extent to which producers who are currently receiving commodity payments also receive conservation payments. Then, a number of hypothetical program scenarios are devised and analyzed to estimate how emphasis on current income support recipients would differ from a combined program that focuses on achieving cost-effective environmental gain. The results show that policymakers face significant tradeoffs between environmental (conservation) objectives and farm income support objectives in designing a program that provides both income support and environmental gain. 
505 0 |a Summary -- Supporting farm income and the environment: can a single program do both? -- Existing conservation and income support programs: different purposes, different payments, different producers -- Green payment program design: a matter of perspective -- Producer participation: doing the math -- Green payment program design tradeoffs: do income support and environmental gain go well together? -- Conclusions. 
500 |a Also available on the World Wide Web. 
504 |a Includes bibliographical references (pages 26-27). 
650 0 |a Agriculture and state  |z United States. 
650 0 |a Agricultural subsidies  |z United States. 
650 0 |a Agricultural conservation  |z United States. 
650 0 |a Farm produce  |x Economic aspects  |z United States. 
700 1 |a Aillery, Marcel P. 
700 1 |a Nickerson, Cynthia J. 
710 1 |a United States.  |b Department of Agriculture.  |b Economic Research Service. 
830 0 |a Economic research report (United States. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service) ;  |v no. 44. 
856 4 1 |u http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/ERR44/ERR44.pdf  |t 0 
948 |a cataloged  |b h  |c 2008/03/10  |e pkellar  |f 4:11:15 pm 
994 |a C0  |b TXA 
999 |a MARS 
999 f f |s 2960e8ef-22ff-3a1b-baaa-89d5873bc718  |i e05d1b56-b144-355f-a6d1-08899223656a  |t 0 
952 f f |p normal  |a Texas A&M University  |b College Station  |c Sterling C. Evans Library  |d Evans: US Documents (Annex 5th floor)  |t 0  |e A 93.73:44  |h Superintendent of Documents classification  |i unmediated -- volume  |m A14836947384 
952 f f |a Texas A&M University  |b College Station  |c Electronic Resources  |d Available Online  |t 0  |e A 93.73:44  |h Superintendent of Documents classification 
998 f f |a A 93.73:44  |t 0  |l Evans: US Documents (Annex 5th floor) 
998 f f |a A 93.73:44  |t 0  |l Available Online