Search

Economic experiments can help inform the design and implementation of government policies, especially newly conceived or novel policies. This report reviews experimental methods, with a focus on when and how they can be effectively used to inform agricultural program decisions. To illustrate the capabilities of experimental methods, five case studies are presented. First, a laboratory study examines whether it is possible to improve the cost-effectiveness of auctions similar to those used in voluntary land retirement programs. A second laboratory study, with both students and farmers, illustrates how a combination of targeting and bonuses may be able to improve environmental outcomes by encouraging coordination among conservation program enrollees. The third study, conducted in the field to more closely mimic real-world conditions, measures how farmers trade off current income against future income and finds farmers will accept less money if paid today rather than in the future. The fourth and fifth studies are randomized controlled trials testing the marketing of USDA programs; these show how outreach letters can increase participation in the Conservation Reserve Program and in county committee elections.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency’s (FSA) Microloan program, launched in January 2013, aims to better serve the credit needs of small farms, beginning farmers and ranchers, veterans, and farmers from historically socially disadvantaged groups (women and minorities). These loans are designed to be more convenient and accessible to nontraditional producers, with a shortened and streamlined application and relaxed criteria for managerial experience, production history, and collateral. Using FSA’s direct loan data to examine Microloan uptake patterns, ERS researchers find that, compared with Microloan-sized traditional Direct Operating Loans, (1) a larger share of Microloans have gone to the targeted groups, and (2) Microloans have attracted a larger number and higher share of borrowers who are new to FSA direct loans. Also, an experiment to test the effectiveness of targeted outreach to farmers proved effective within the States that were included in the experiment: significantly more farmers received Microloans in ZIP Codes that had received the informational letters versus those in ZIP Codes that had not.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture spends over $5 billion per year on conservation programs, mostly on voluntary programs that give financial assistance to farmers and landowners to provide environmental services (such as implementing nutrient management programs or planting native grasses). Since most programs cannot fund all interested parties, program managers must use some mechanism to select applicants. One option is to elicit offers through an auction. This report addresses the use of auctions in conservation programs. It considers how information in the hands of Government officials and rural landowners affects the auction’s performance, and how auction design can reduce Government expenditures or encourage landowners to provide greater environmental services. Results of laboratory experiments are discussed, highlighting shortcomings of common features of conservation program auctions (such as limits on the rent landowners may request), as well as how alternative auction designs can improve performance.

We elicit time-discounting behavior from U.S. farmers that are broadly known to be either late or early adopters of farming best management practices. Using a single-choice experiment, we estimate the mean discount rate for each farmer group and find that late adopters have a mean discount rate that is thirteen percentage points higher than the mean rate of early adopters. We argue through simulations that this difference is likely due to differences in time preference rather than risk aversion.

In this article we specify a model of millet prices in the three West African countries of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger. Using data obtained from USAID’s Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET) we present a unique regional cereal price forecasting model that takes advantage of the panel nature of our data, and accounts for the flow of millet across markets. Another novel aspect of our analysis is our use of the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) to detect and control for variation in conditions for productivity. The average absolute out-of-sample prediction error for 4- month-ahead millet prices is about 20 %.

The 2002 and 2008 Farm Acts increased funding for conservation programs that provide financial assistance to farmers to implement conservation practices on working farmland. Along with seeking cost-effective environmental benefits, these programs have a goal of spreading conservation funding equitably across States. The 2002 and 2008 Farm Acts strengthened this allocative goal by setting a minimum threshold for conservation funding for each State—one that exceeds historical funding for some States—for enrolling agricultural producers in specified conservation programs. This study uses conservation program data to examine evidence of the impacts of the Regional Equity provision of the 2002 Farm Act, and explores the tradeoffs that can occur among conservation program goals when legislation gives primacy to fund allocation. The study found that cross-State shifts in funding reduced the acres receiving conservation treatment for many resource problems, but increased the net economic benefits from treatments on some of them. Overall impacts on the types of producers enrolled were small.

Conservation programs faced with limited budgets often use a competitive enrollment mechanism. Goals of enrollment might include minimizing program expenditures, encouraging broad participation, and inducing adoption of enhanced environmental practices. We use experimental methods to evaluate an auction mechanism that incorporates bid maximums and quality adjustments. We examine this mechanism’s performance characteristics when opportunity costs are heterogeneous across potential participants, and when costs are only approximately known by the purchaser. We find that overly stringent maximums can increase overall expenditures, and that when quality of offers is important, substantial increases in offer maximums can yield a better quality-adjusted result.