Evaluating Input Standards for Non‐Point Pollution Control under Firm Heterogeneity

The efficacy and cost of input standards for reducing nitrate pollution from New Zealand dairy production are evaluated. In contrast to previous studies, firm heterogeneity is explicitly considered through the novel integration of efficient techniques for the calibration and decomposition of large optimisation models. Nitrogen fertiliser application should not be targeted by policy given its minor role in determining emissions. In contrast, livestock intensity is an appropriate base for regulation given its strong correlation with pollutant load. Abatement cost increases as stocking rate declines, but this can be offset at low levels of regulation through utilising slack feed resources to improve per-cow milk production. Both uniform and differentiated input standards based on livestock intensity achieve substantial decreases in pollutant load at moderate cost. However, because of disparity in the slopes of abatement cost curves across firms, a differentiated policy is more cost-effective at the levels of regulation required to achieve key societal goals for improved water quality. Copyright (c) 2010 The Author. Journal compilation (c) 2010 The Agricultural Economics Society.

[1]  J. Roche,et al.  Effect of stocking rate on pasture production, milk production, and reproduction of dairy cows in pasture-based systems. , 2008, Journal of dairy science.

[2]  M. J. Hedley,et al.  A climate‐driven, soil fertility dependent, pasture production model , 2000 .

[3]  David J. Pannell,et al.  Flat Earth Economics: The Far-reaching Consequences of Flat Payoff Functions in Economic Decision Making , 2006 .

[4]  R. Horan,et al.  Uniform and Non-Uniform Second-Best Input Taxes , 2001 .

[5]  Richard E. Howitt,et al.  Positive Mathematical Programming , 1995 .

[6]  C. Basset-Mens,et al.  Eco-efficiency of intensification scenarios for milk production in New Zealand , 2009 .

[7]  T. Burt,et al.  The effectiveness of nitrate vulnerable zones for limiting surface water nitrate concentrations - the failure of nutrient input management. , 2009 .

[8]  Experiments on Damage‐Based Ambient Taxes for Nonpoint Source Polluters , 2008 .

[9]  A. E. Buckwell,et al.  IMPLICATIONS OF AGGREGATION BIAS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF STATIC AND DYNAMIC LINEAR PROGRAMMING SUPPLY MODELS , 1972 .

[10]  Thiagarajah Ramilan,et al.  Improving Water Quality through Environmental Policies and Farm Management: an Environmental Economics Analysis of Dairy Farming in Karapiro Catchment , 2008 .

[11]  R. Adams,et al.  The Importance of Site-Specific Information in the Design of Policies to Control Pollution , 1997 .

[12]  S. Ledgard,et al.  Nutrient management in New Zealand pastures— recent developments and future issues , 2007 .

[13]  Richard D. Horan,et al.  The Economics of Nonpoint Pollution Control , 2002 .

[14]  D. Mccall,et al.  Optimized dairy grazing systems in the northeast United States and New Zealand. I. Model description and evaluation. , 1999, Journal of dairy science.

[15]  Gloria E. Helfand,et al.  Regulating Nonpoint Source Pollution Under Heterogeneous Conditions , 1995 .

[16]  W. Dodds,et al.  Eutrophication of U.S. freshwaters: analysis of potential economic damages. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[17]  J. Shogren,et al.  Economic Instruments and Environmental Policy in Agriculture , 1998 .

[18]  Richard G. Newell,et al.  Cost Heterogeneity and the Potential Savings from Market-Based Policies , 2002 .

[19]  R. Goetz,et al.  Determining the economic gains from regulation at the extensive and intensive margins , 2005 .

[20]  David Zilberman,et al.  The Gains from Differentiated Policies to Control Stock Pollution When Producers are Heterogeneous , 2008 .