Search results

The literature argues on ambiguous impacts of different types of the common agricultural policy (CAP) subsidies on farm technical efficiency (TE). The purpose of this paper is to estimate and analyse the TE and the impact of the CAP subsidies on the TE of wine farms in Hungary using the farm accountancy data network data set in the period 2013–2019.

The authors use stochastic frontiers analysis (SFA) models to estimate the TE scores for the Hungarian wine farms with four wine farm-level inputs in terms of agricultural land, labour, capital and intermediate consumption. The TE scores are explained by the CAP subsidies and economic wine farm size. The different SFA models were applied with robustness tests to investigate the drivers of the TE values of wineries.

Like for Hungarian farms in general, the distribution of the wine farm structure is a dual with a greater number of smaller wine farms and a smaller number of bigger wine farms. The agricultural land, capital and intermediate consumption are significantly positively associated with the wine farm TE. With higher capital intensity wine farm TE increase. The results imply that the CAP subsidies decrease the TE of the Hungarian wine farms, whereas economic farm size increase.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is one of the first specific efficiency studies on the wine sector in the Central and Eastern European region and the first one for Hungary to evaluate the TE at wine farm level and to assess the impact of CAP subsidies and economic farm size on wine farm (in)efficiency to apply production technologies and use farm resources. This study is among the first that applied the fixed-effects stochastic frontier model at the wine farm level to measure the drivers of the TE scores.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the risk management benefits provided by the supplemental coverage option (SCO) insurance plan which was created in the 2014 Farm Bill. Specifically, the marginal expected utility benefits are compared with the potential additional subsidy cost introduced by the new program for a stylized example of a corn producer.

The paper uses a stylized simulation model examines the preferred insurance program choice for a typical Midwestern corn farmer. The expected utility of the farmer is calculated under their preferred insurance program choice both with and without the availability of the SCO program, and compared to the case where crop insurance is not available. Scenarios are examined for a range of farmer risk aversion levels, different levels of correlation between farm-level and county-level corn yields, and case with and without insurance premium subsidies.

The SCO program is found to enter into the preferred insurance program choice for risk averse farmers. As risk aversion increases, farmers are estimated to prefer higher coverage levels for individual products along with SCO coverage. While the availability of existing crop insurance programs are shown to substantially increase the expected utility of farmers, the marginal impact of adding SCO to the crop insurance program is relatively small. Furthermore, the additional expected benefits generated by SCO are shown to include both risk management and expected return components. With subsidies removed, the estimated marginal benefits provided by SCO are reduced significantly.

The findings of this paper can help inform the policy debate for future farm bills as agricultural support programs continue to evolve. The results in this paper can also be used to help explain farm-level decision making related to crop insurance program choices.

This paper contributes to the literature by documenting a new, federally supported risk management programs made available to farmers in the 2014 Farm Bill and evaluates the marginal benefits the SCO program offers US crop producers.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the multiplier effects of the grain subsidy program in China, which is a large food self-sufficiency project that is implemented as a cash transfer program. Income multiplier effects have not been empirically examined in the evaluation of the grain subsidy program although increasing the income of farmers is the original goal of this project.

A large number of household-level observations are employed to measure the program’s income multiplier. An unrestricted model was first employed to measure the multipliers in a period of two years, and the difference was evaluated. Then, the income promotion effects of grain subsidy on various income sources for each specific subset of the population, such as liquidity conditions and household characteristics, were estimated.

The results show that the grain subsidy program has a high income multiplier, and the income promotion effect of the transferred subsidies is from agricultural production derived by intensifying input for each unit of land. The multiplier effect of the grain subsidy program as a cash transfer program can be interpreted as the shadow value of relaxing liquidity constraints and could be particularly utilized by households with more farming land and farmers in less developed regions in China. Hence, to maximize the income multiplier effect, the grain subsidy distribution method should consider these criteria instead of retaining the prevalent standard that is based on contracted land areas.

This study addresses the gap that the effect of China’s grain subsidy program on income increment has not been empirically examined in nation wide.

Rent seeking is endemic to the process through which any policy or regulatory initiative is developed in the USA. The purpose of this paper is to show how farm and other interest groups have formed coalitions to benefit themselves at the expense of the federal government by examining the legislative history of the federal crop insurance program.

The federal crop insurance legislation and the way in which the USDA Risk Management Agency manages federal crop insurance program are replete with complex and subtle policy initiatives. Using a new theoretical framework, the study examines how, since 1980, three major legislative initiatives – the 1980 Federal Crop Insurance Act, the 1994 Crop Insurance Reform Act and the 2000 Agricultural Risk Protection Act – were designed to jointly benefit farm interest groups and the agricultural insurance industry, largely through increases in government subsidies.

Each of the three legislative initiatives examined here included provisions that, when considered individually, benefitted farmers and adversely affected the insurance industry, and vice versa. However, the joint effects of the multiple adjustments included in each of those legislative initiatives generated net benefits for both sets of interest groups. The evidence, therefore, indicates that coalitions formed between the farm and insurance lobbies to obtain policy changes that, when aggregated, benefited both groups, as well as banks with agricultural lending portfolios. However, those benefits came at an increasingly substantial cost to taxpayers through federal government subsidies.

This is the first analysis of the US federal crop insurance program to examine the issue of coalition formation.

In the United States, successive farm bills and the 2007 Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) have largely defined domestic subsidy and conservation programs and U.S. food-aid initiatives over the past decade. This chapter examines the effects of the current mixture of U.S. agricultural policies and international food-aid programs on domestic and global food-insecure populations. A detailed research-based examination is carried out with respect to the impacts of U.S. subsidy programs on agricultural production, domestic and global agricultural commodity prices, and their implications for food-insecure populations. The impacts of the RFS are assessed along with the effects of current and potentially reformed U.S. international food-aid programs.

This study concludes that current U.S. agricultural subsidy programs have small or negligible impacts on the aggregate level and mixture of U.S. agricultural output, U.S. domestic prices and global prices, and domestic and global food insecurity among poor households. The RFS has increased prices for food and feed grain and oilseeds with adverse implications for the urban poor in developing countries and some poor U.S. households. The portfolios of U.S. food-aid programs are managed inefficiently because of congressional mandates designed to aid special interest groups that waste 30% of the current budget. While U.S. subsidy programs likely should be moderated for other reasons, they have few impacts on domestic and globally food-insecure households. However, in relation to global and domestic food insecurity, the RFS should be discontinued and major reforms to U.S. international food aid implemented.

This article aims to investigate the financial constraints and nonlinearity of farm size growth.

Farm size growth is measured with land, labor and output using data from the Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) for Hungary and Slovenia. A dynamic panel model is applied to assess financial constraints and nonlinearity of farm size growth.

Results show that, except for land in Slovenia and output in Hungary, liquidity constraints are less important for farm size growth than endogenous factors based on farm size growth expectations and steady farm size restructuring. Smaller farms are growing faster than larger ones. The hypothesis that a higher level of subsidies would increase farm size is not supported for Hungary. When farms reach a certain size, the land area of the largest farms increases. Farm debts in Hungary are linked with land growth and in Slovenia with output growth.

Further research on the impact of liquidity constraints and subsidies can be conducted at a disaggregate farm-type level to examine whether there is variability in the underlying interlinkages at the farm-type specialization level.

The implication that farm size growth is dependent on initial size and that smaller farms are growing faster than bigger ones indicates that it is not necessary to favor the fastest growing smaller farms thus supports the application of a non-discriminatory farm size policy for observing farm size structural changes.

The dynamic panel econometric model that incorporates cash flow as a measure of financial constraints provides insight into farm size growth in cross-country comparison in relation to potential farm liquidity constraints, farm debt and the nonlinearity of farm size, which information is of relevance to policy makers and practitioners.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the growth and rising costs association with the Federal Crop Insurance program in the USA, justifications for public support, and recent reforms that have been implemented or proposed to reduce program costs. It also analyzes a specific policy to reduce premium assistance spending.

Data from the Risk Management Agency are used to illustrate historical trends in crop insurance program costs and to analyze the impacts of imposing a per acre cap on premium assistance.

Imposing a per acre cap on premium assistance could achieve significant savings. A $20 per acre cap is estimated to reduce premium subsidy expenditures by more than 40 percent. However, the impact of such a policy would be most severe on crops currently receiving the largest subsidies per acre, which happen to be some of the largest program crops in the USA.

This paper adds to the literature analyzing potential reform in crop insurance industry. The subsidy cap considered has been proposed and considered by policy makers, and this paper provides estimates for its potential savings.

This paper suggests that a corporate-environmental food regime is emerging as part of a larger restructuring of capitalism. Like past food regimes, it reflects specific social and political compromises, which I interpret through the social movement concept of interpretive frames. The diasporic-colonial food regime of 1870–1914 grew up in response to working class movements in Europe, and created a historically unprecedent class of commercial family farmers. When world markets collapsed, those farmers entered into new alliances, including one that led to the mercantile-industrial food regime of 1947–1973. Lineaments of a new food regime based on quality audited supply chains seems to be emerging in the space opened by impasse in international negotiations over food standards. Led by food retailers, agrofood corporations are selectively appropriating demands of environmental, food safety, animal welfare, fair trade, and other social movements that arose in the interstices of the second food regime. If it consolidates, the new food regime promises to shift the historical balance between public and private regulation, and to widen the gap between privileged and poor consumers as it deepens commodification and marginalizes existing peasants. Social movements are already regrouping and consolidation of the regime remains uncertain.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the economic performance of Norwegian crop farms using a stochastic frontier analysis.

The analysis was based on a translog cost function and unbalanced farm-level panel data for 1991–2013 from 455 Norwegian farms specialized in crop production in eastern and central regions of Norway.

The results of the analysis show that the mean efficiency was about 78–81 percent. Farm management practices and socioeconomic factors were shown to significantly affect the economic performance of Norwegian crop farms.

Farmers are getting different types of support from the government and the study does not account for the different effects of different kinds of subsidy on cost efficiency. Different subsidies might have different effects on farm performance. To get more informative and useful results, it would be necessary to repeat the analysis with less aggregated data on subsidy payments.

One implication for farmers (and their advisers) is that many of them are less efficient than the estimated benchmark (best performing farms). Thus, those lagging behind the best performing farms need to look at the way they are operating and to seek out ways to save costs or increase crop production. Perhaps there are things for lagging farmers to learn from their more productive farming neighbors. For instance, those farmers not practicing crop rotation might be well advised to try that practice.

For both taxpayers and consumers, one implication is that the contributions they pay that go to subsidize farmers appear to bring some benefits in terms of more efficient production that, in turn, increase the supply of some foods so possibly making food prices more affordable.

Unlike previous performance studies in the literature, the authors estimated farm-level economic performance accounting for the contribution of both an important farm management practice and selected socioeconomic factors. Good farm management practices, captured through crop rotation, land tenure, government support and off-farm activities were found to have made a positive and statistically significant contribution to reducing the cost of production on crop-producing farms in the Central and Eastern regions of Norway.

The study attempts to estimate farm subsidies the governments can save by transitioning to a millet-based production system, replacing GHG emission-intensive crops.

It updates a 131 × 131 commodity input–output (IO) table of the year 2015–16 into 2021–22 using the RAS procedure and simulates the economy-wide impacts of replacing rice and wheat with pearl millet and sorghum using consumption and production approaches. It then quantifies fertilizer, electricity and credit subsidy expenses the government can save through this intervention. It also estimates the potential reduction in GHG emissions that the transition could bring about. India is taken as a case.

Results show pearl millet expansion brings greater benefits to the government. It is estimated that when households return to their pearl millet consumption rates that prevailed in the early-reform period, this could save the Indian government Rs. 622 crores (USD 75 m). The savings shall be reinvested in agriculture to finance climate adaptation/mitigation efforts, contributing to a sustainable food system. Net GHG emissions also decline by 3.3–3.6 MMT CO2e.

Indian government has been actively aiming to bring down paddy areas since 2013–14 through the Crop Diversification Program and promoting millets (and pulses and oilseeds) on these farms. The prime reason is to check rapidly declining groundwater irrigation in Green Revolution states. Regulations in the past in these states have not brought the intended results. Meanwhile, electricity and fertilizers are heavily subsidized for agriculture. A slight shift in the cropping system can help conserve these resources. Meanwhile, GHG emissions could also be brought down and subsidies could well be saved. The results of the study indicate the same.

A less warm society is what governments and nongovernment organizations across the world are aiming for at present. Financial implications affect actions against climate change to a greater extent, apart from technological innovations. The effects of policy strategies discussed in the study, taking a large country as a case, when implemented appropriately around the regions, could help move a step closer to action against climate change.

The paper addresses a key but rarely explored research issue – that how a climate-sensitive crop choice will help reduce the government’s fiscal burden to finance climate adaption/mitigation. It also offers a mechanism to estimate the benefits within an economy-wide framework.