The Growth of U.S. Farm Programs

2013 ◽  
pp. 456-489 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randal R. Rucker ◽  
E. C. Pasour
Keyword(s):  
Farm Programs

scholarly journals Is the New Deal Dead? Government, Economics, and the Rural South

1997 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia A. Duffy
Keyword(s):  
New Deal ◽  
Presidential Address ◽  
Farm Bill ◽  
Rural South ◽  
Farm Programs ◽  
The New Deal ◽  
Better Than

A year ago, apprehensive about writing this address, I spoke with former president Joe Broder. He advised me to pick something I cared about deeply. That advice, although well meant, left me rather stymied. I care about teaching, but Joe Broder's own presidential address had handled that topic better than I thought I could. So I floundered for a while, without gaining a focus. Then came August and the signing into law of the new welfare bill. A few months earlier, farm programs had also been vastly modified. My topic finally came together. The combination of the 1996 Farm Bill and the new welfare legislation clearly signaled major changes for the rural South, and I wondered what these changes would entail.

scholarly journals Impact of Proposed Changes in Commodity Programs on Farmers and Agricultural Business in the Northeast

1977 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 180-184
Author(s):  
K. L. Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Farm Income ◽  
Farm Programs ◽  
Agricultural Business ◽  
Commodity Programs ◽  
The Cost ◽  
On Farm

The proposed changes in commodity programs which are now being considered by Congress will not have a major impact on the incomes of farmers in the Northeast nor on sales of firms supplying inputs or services to farmers. This conclusion is based on the assumption that the principal changes finally adopted will be to raise target prices for wheat, and to a lesser degree for corn, and to encourage on-farm storage of these commodities. Neither commodity, of course, is an important source of farm income in most of the states represented at this meeting. One of the consequences of raising target prices, however, will be to increase the cost of farm programs. Substantial government payments are likely to be made once again to producers of wheat and perhaps to those growing corn and cotton as well.

Japanese Beef Tariffs: Beef Quality, Farm Programs, and Producer Compensation

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Schmitz ◽  
James L. Seale ◽  
Claudine Chegini
Keyword(s):  
Complete Removal ◽  
Tariff Reduction ◽  
Farm Policy ◽  
Welfare Gains ◽  
Price Supports ◽  
Farm Programs ◽  
Partnership Agreement ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Tariff Reductions ◽  
Farm Program

Abstract Beef is a highly protected commodity in Japan and the number of studies on the impact of beef import tariff reduction has increased in light of the controversy over the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA), in which the gains from freer trade in beef was a major point of discussion. We estimate that an 11% tariff reduction for Japanese imports of both Australian and U.S. beef can generate a net welfare gain to Japan of between US$92 million and US$915 million. These results are not overly sensitive to whether beef is treated as homogeneous or heterogeneous. A more significant determinant of welfare gains is the extent to which farm policy would be decoupled along with tariff reductions. Under a decoupled farm program, producer welfare can remain unchanged while the net gain from freer trade is identical to that of complete removal of price supports with no compensation to producers. Therefore, negotiators for U.S. and Australian beef interests should lobby for both lowered tariffs and a decoupling of domestic farm policy within the importing country. This seems to have been the case as Japan was willing to move toward a more decoupled farm program under the TPPA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document