Search

First paragraph: The legalization of hemp provides a new oppor­tunity for small farmers in the U.S., and com­ing on the heels of trade wars and depressed crop returns, the timing couldn’t be better. However, while hemp production could support a decent living for these small farmers, production opportu­nities such as this will draw interest from producers of all sizes, which may determine its profitability. Hemp, just like any other crop, can be produced on a massive scale. The industrial system stands at the ready with machines, inputs, land-grant agricul­tural research universities, transportation systems, markets, and capital to plant hemp on large acre­ages and then process, market, and deliver it to consumers. Once unleashed, the vast majority of the crop could be grown on large acreages under industrial management, mechanized, and with few people on the land. Organic hemp could be an­other option offered by the industrial model, but could be equally mechanized. Within five to 10 years, any current profit advantage of hemp to farmers could diminish to the low level of market returns offered by other industrial crops like corn or beans. . . .

Some have suggested that in order for local foods to reach broader consumer segments and become price-competitive with foods sold in mainstream market channels, local farmers need to scale up their production and distribution operations to match the efficiencies of the conventional food system. In this study, we take a first step in evaluating how scaling up production and distribution could make locally produced foods more competitive with the conventional food system. We compare the transportation efficiencies of the conventional and local fruit and vegetable transportation networks in Knoxville, Tennessee, and determine the Knoxville-area food system's competitive transportation zones, defined as the region in which local farmers' shorter travel distances to market give them a locational advantage in transportation over their long distance, conventional food supply chain competitors. We analyze the extent to which local farmers' scales of production and distribution affect their transportation efficiencies, and we investigate factors that could improve their competitiveness with conventional distribution networks. We find that farms located within 25 miles (40 km) of the downtown market tended to deliver their produce to market at least as efficiently as conventionally distributed foods from California. More distant farms needed to scale up their production and distribution operations to remain within the competitive transportation zones. Investigating travel distance thresholds could provide policy-makers with useful information in planning land use and infrastructure investment projects for local food systems and in designating sustainable geographic boundaries for foodsheds and local food economies.

Prevented planting payments reimburse crop producers for losses from not being able to plant. These payments provide critical protection to producers; however, these payments, which are determined using a nationwide, crop-specific coverage factor, have been questioned to induce moral hazard. Depending on the region and crop insurance coverage, payments from this provision exceed producers’ losses. This paper estimates the prevented planting coverage factor by coverage level and region that would equitably reimburse corn and soybean producers for their losses. We find the prevented planting coverage factor has significant variation across coverage levels and location within our study region. The prevented planting coverage factor was found to decline as the policy coverage level increases. The further north in the study region the higher the coverage factor, likely due to increased land rent expenses. The results provide a unique perspective of how these coverage factors would vary to equitably compensate producers for losses, which addresses the moral hazard concerns with prevented planting.