Socio-economics of alternative tillage systems

Abstract

Socio-economic as well as technical aspects of conventional (autumn mouldboard plough), full-width no plough (chisel plough) and no tillage systems are compared from the viewpoints of farmers, non-farm public, and society as a whole. Either form of conservation tillage helps to increase protective surface residues, reduce soil erosion, maintain long-term soil productivity and reduce sediment and phosphorus loadings into watercourses. Reduced watercourse loadings translate into decreased off-site damage costs (or externalities) in the form of lower costs to the public purse of cleaning up water used for agriculture, drinking, industry, wildlife habitat and recreation. Reduced externalities should be sufficient to offset combined public (administration and policy implementation) costs and any on-farm net costs of adopting and using conservation tillage. The net benefit or net cost outcomes of on-farm economics are dependent on such factors as natural resource endowments (soil type and depth, topography, distance to watercourses, etc.), climate, types of crops grown and their rotational sequence, and farmer managerial capabilities with conservation tillage systems. An empirical application to a southern Ontario watershed indicates that net on-farm economic benefits of conservation tillage are possible, and, together with reduced externalities through improved sport fishing facilities and reduced watercourse dredging costs, shows that overall net benefits to society are possible.