Three Essays on the Production Effects of Decoupled Payments: Do Decoupled Payments Matter for Acres and Yields?

dc.contributor.advisorNick Piggott, Committee Memberen_US
dc.contributor.advisorWalter N. Thurman, Committee Memberen_US
dc.contributor.advisorIvan T. Kandilov, Committee Memberen_US
dc.contributor.advisorBarry K. Goodwin, Committee Chairen_US
dc.contributor.authorGirante, Maria Joana Sacramentoen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-04-02T19:02:54Z
dc.date.available2010-04-02T19:02:54Z
dc.date.issued2009-12-05en_US
dc.degree.disciplineEconomicsen_US
dc.degree.leveldissertationen_US
dc.degree.namePhDen_US
dc.description.abstractConventional wisdom suggests that if decoupled payments do not distort market incentives, they should not distort production or trade. But the literature has identified several potential “coupling†mechanisms that suggest theory and practice are not in accord. Using both estimation and simulation methods, we analyze the effect of decoupled payments on farmers’ decisions in the presence of one such mechanism, credit constraints. Intuitively, as payments enhance the liquidity and/or the collateral of credit constrained farmers, additional investment in production is allowed to occur. We estimate the marginal effect of decoupled payments on total, owned, and pasture acres, and on acres of corn, sorghum, soybeans, and wheat and observe whether payments matter more for more leveraged farmers. Our ability to observe farms over time allows us to improve on the existing literature by controlling for farm-specific unobserved effects. In an effort to analyze the income stabilization aspect of these payments we further estimate their effect on farm household consumption expenditures. The significant acreage effects and insignificant marginal propensity to consume suggest payments are being not put to the policy makers’ intended use. We also extend the existing literature by using simulation methods in an expected utility maximization framework to evaluate the effects of doubling the amount of payments received and of recently proposed tighter payment limits on the typical Kansas wheat farmer’s acreage and borrowing decisions. While tighter limits do not appear to matter, the collateral boosting effect of payments allows farmers to put more acres into production. Finally, we estimate the ability of farm characteristics to explain differences in crop yield performance. Our results reveal the potential for decoupled payments to boost relative yields and give an unfair advantage to their recipients. This may become an issue in future WTO discussions over the distortionary effects of decoupled payments.en_US
dc.identifier.otheretd-11062008-094354en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/1840.16/4879
dc.rightsI hereby certify that, if appropriate, I have obtained and attached hereto a written permission statement from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis, dis sertation, or project report, allowing distribution as specified below. I certify that the version I submitted is the same as that approved by my advisory committee. I hereby grant to NC State University or its agents the non-exclusive license to archive and make accessible, under the conditions specified below, my thesis, dissertation, or project report in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of the thesis, dissertation or project report. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis, dissertation, or project report.en_US
dc.subjectAcreage Decisionsen_US
dc.subjectDecoupled Paymentsen_US
dc.subjectCredit Constraintsen_US
dc.titleThree Essays on the Production Effects of Decoupled Payments: Do Decoupled Payments Matter for Acres and Yields?en_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
etd.pdf
Size:
1.19 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections