Do Conventional Comparative Cost Efficiency Analyses Adequately Value Nitrogen Loss Reduction Best Management Practices?

Shalamar D Armstrong

doi:10.19080/artoaj.2017.12.555861

Abstract

Do Conventional Comparative Cost Efficiency Analyses Adequately Value Nitrogen Loss Reduction Best Management Practices?

Highlights

Growing awareness of nutrient contamination from row crop agriculture and its link to surface water contamination, such as the Gulf of Mexico Hypoxic Zone, has increased public pressure on agriculture to reduce our environmental footprint [1,2,3]
Producers are implementing best management practices (BMPs) to prevent excessive nutrient losses, which contribute to public safety and environmental issues, through voluntary adoption or governmental cost share initiatives
Cover cropping (CC) potentially provides multiple soil health benefits, beyond reducing surface water N contamination, that are not included in traditional comparative cost efficiency (CCE) calculations, the ratio of implementation costs to nitrogen load reduction

Summary

Introduction

Growing awareness of nutrient contamination from row crop agriculture and its link to surface water contamination, such as the Gulf of Mexico Hypoxic Zone, has increased public pressure on agriculture to reduce our environmental footprint [1,2,3]. Producers are implementing best management practices (BMPs) to prevent excessive nutrient losses, which contribute to public safety and environmental issues, through voluntary adoption or governmental cost share initiatives. CC potentially provides multiple soil health benefits, beyond reducing surface water N contamination, that are not included in traditional comparative cost efficiency (CCE) calculations, the ratio of implementation costs to nitrogen load reduction. These demonstrated environmental and soil health benefits have not translated into producer adoption, only 2% of cropland acreage in the U.S has adopted CC and only 4% of U.S farmers have used cover crops [8]. We intend to discuss CCEs for several common NLR BMPs, argue that inclusion of cost-benefit analyses in CCE estimations of CC may help producers value the sshortterm benefits of cc, and assert that there is a need for further research examining the economics of combinations of best management practices on field, watershed, and regional scales

Fundamental Differences in Edge of Field and InField NLR BMPs

Findings

Illinois Nutrient Loss Reduction