From hawiaa@access.digex.netFri Mar 24 17:27:10 1995 Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 13:55:06 -0500 (EST) From: Wallace Institute To: sanet-mg@wolf.ces.ncsu.edu Subject: Wallace Institute releases new reports TWO RECENT REPORTS AVAILABLE FROM THE WALLACE INSTITUTE 1. "Lean, Mean and Green...Designing Farm Support Programs in a New Era," by Sarah Lynch and Katherine R. Smith. Policy Studies Program Report No. 3. Greenbelt, MD: Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture, Dec. 1994. 27 pages; color maps included. Price: $ 7.50/copy Green Support Programs, under which farm income support would be provided in return for farmers' provision of environmental protection, reflect a relatively new concept in agricultural policy. This report provides an overview of the concept, delineates the various critical decisions that must be made in designing a Green Support Program, and explores the implications of and tradeoffs involved in making those decisions. By clearly defining the broad opportunities and limitations of Green Support Programs, it aims to inform the evolving debate about the concept and provide general guidance to those involved in designing, promoting, or evaluating policy options that fall in this class. 2. "Designing Green Support Programs," edited by Sarah Lynch. Policy Studies Program Report No. 4. Greenbelt, MD: Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture, Dec. 1994. 119 pages. Price: $ 10.00/copy This companion to "Lean, Mean and Green..." provides in-depth analysis of several of the critical decisions that must be made in designing a Green Support Program. Contents Include the following. a. "Designing Green Farm Programs: A Range of Options," by Sarah Lynch, Wallace Institute. This paper provides a brief overview of agriculture's general relation to environmental quality and highlights some of the strengths and weaknesses of alternative policy approaches to resolving agroenvironmental problems. b. "Targeting Green Support Payments: The Geographic Interface Between Agriculture and the Environment," by Ralph E. Heimlich, USDA, Economic Research Service. This paper shows how environmental indicators, developed using readily available data, can provide information on the geographic distribution of potential environmental damages from agricultural production which may, in turn, prove useful in targeting green support or other agroenvironmental program benefits to those locations where they are likely to generate the biggest environmental "bang for the buck." The development of 11 different environmental indicators relevant to agroenvironmental problems is documented. Maps illustrating the geographic distribution of these indicators under different weighting schemes are included in the paper. c. "Designing Green Support: Incentive Compatibility and the Commodity Programs," by Professor C. Ford Runge, University of Minnesota. Using clear and compelling logic, Runge demonstrates the relationships between green support programs and five main commodity program areas: deficiency payments resulting from the loan rate/target price structure; acreage reduction programs; conservation compliance, sodbuster and swampbuster programs; the Conservation Reserve Program; and GATT obligations and planting flexibility as a form of decoupling. He also develops the policy changes that are required to make existing programs more compatible with green supports. d. "Designing a Successful Voluntary Green Support Program: What Do We Know?" by Sandra S. Batie, Elton R. Smith Professor of Food and Agricultural Policy, Michigan State University. Batie reviews a voluminous literature to draw new and insightful conclusions about the relationship between farm profitability and stewardship behavior, and what this implies for the types of practices that ought to be rewarded through a green support or other agroenvironmental incentives program. Her review also leads her to derive seven elements necessary for a successful, voluntary green support program. e. "Implementation Issues for Alternative Green Support Programs," by Professor Jerry R. Skees, University of Kentucky. Skees tackles the issues of political motivation, bureaucratic behavior, and stakeholder interests in how a green support program might actually be applied. He looks also at the needs for accountability, and the roles of science, technology and information in alternative implementation schemes, and derives some general pros and cons concerning state versus federal implementation and implementation by various different agencies. ** To order a copy of either report, send a check by mail to: The Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture, Suite 117, 9200 Edmonston Road, Greenbelt, Maryland 20770-1551. Or, call us at (301) 441-8777 or E-mail your request (making sure to indicate which title(s) you wish to receive), and tell us how to invoice you or your organization.