Slippage Effects of the Conservation Reserve Program

By Junjie Wu. 2000

295 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Agricultural and Biological Sciences

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a5447d3284ea4921f3481367589a3be887c9a5b8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In General Agricultural and Biological Sciences

Citations in the corpus

Leakage and Comparative Advantage Implications of Agricultural Participation in Greenhouse Gas Emission Mitigation (2007, background): “Wu (2000) examined leakage relative to the US Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), which pays farmers to retire land from crop production.”
Economic consequences of consideration of permanence, leakage and additionality for soil carbon sequestration projects (2007, background): “Measurement of market displacement as in Alig et al. (1997), Wu (2000) , Sohngen and Brown (2004), and Murray et al. (2004) captures both distant (secondary) and local (primary) leakage.”
Market inefficiencies and the adoption of agricultural technologies in developing countries 1 (2013, background): “Experience with incentive-based approaches in developing countries remains limited, but developed country policy evaluations point out potential pitfalls (e.g. Wu 2000).”
Baseline, leakage and measurement issues: how do forestry and energy projects compare? (2002, background): “Wu (2000) looks at leakage in the US Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), which pays farmers to retire land from crop production in order to reduce erosion.”
Payment for Ecosystem Services from Forests (2014, background): “National and local forest PES programs, however, are just one of a variety of strategies that countries might use to achieve REDD+ goals. Currently, most REDD+ programs are still in the development stage. To date, UN-REDD has financed the development of REDD+ strategies in 16 partner countries, and ”
Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries (2008, methodology): “PES case studies In this special issue we follow Wunder (2005) in defining PES as (a) a voluntary transaction where (b) a well-defined environmental service (ES) or a land-use likely to secure that service (c) is being ‘bought’ by a (minimum one) service buyer (d) from a (minimum one) service provid”
Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity (2011, unknown): “A similar leakage effect was found for cropland in the United States, where the purchase of conservation easements on farmland brought noncropland into crop production elsewhere, for ≈20% of the cropland area that was retired from cultivation (36).”
The role of deforestation risk and calibrated compensation in designing payments for environmental services (2008, background): “In the summer of 2002, Mexico’s National Ecology Institute (INE), together with the Iberoamericana University, the Center for Economic Education and Research (CIDE), the University of California at Berkeley, and the World Bank, conducted a nationwide survey of Mexican ejidos.”
Habitat and Open Space at Risk of Land-Use Conversion: Targeting Strategies for Land Conservation (2006, unknown): “For instance, Wu (2000) demonstrated that the slippage effect may result in a 9 to 14 percent loss of environmental benefits achieved for land retirement payments under the Conservation Reserve Program.”
The Sustainability of Agricultural Development in China: The Agriculture–Environment Nexus (2018, background): “[73] and the forest protection program in Mexico [74], need to be carefully monitored in SLCP, etc.”
Environmental and Distributional Impacts of Conservation Targeting Strategies (2001, background): “Summary and Conclusions This study provides an empirical application of Wu, Zilberman, and Babcock (2001). Specifically, we compare the environmental and economic effects of alternative targeting strategies (benefit, cost, and benefit-cost ratio targeting) for reducing nitrate-N water pollution.”