Because of high commodity prices, beginning in 2006, subsidies to farmers in the United States, the European Union, and Canada have been reduced significantly. However, significant losses have been experienced by the red meat sector, along with escalating food prices. Because of rising input costs, the “farm boom” may not be as great as first thought. Ethanol made from corn and country-of-origin labeling cloud the U.S. policy scene. Higher commodity prices have caused some countries to lower tariff and non-tariff barriers, resulting in freer commodity trade worldwide. Policymakers should attempt to make these trade-barrier cuts permanent and should rethink current policy legislation to deal with the possibility of a collapse of world commodity markets. Agricultural commodity prices have dropped significantly since early 2008.

This article updates and expands the literature on the impact of production quotas. Unlike many of the early studies, our focus is largely on the removal of production quota programs. We study cases wherein production quota programs have been eliminated and quota owners were compensated for their losses. Specifically, we examine (1) production quotas in both the absence and presence of trade, (2) production quota buyouts (three case studies), (3) sources of funding, and (4) general equilibrium considerations. A fifth section briefly discusses externalities, the interpretation of consumer surplus measures, and the nature of conducting economic analyses of addictive goods.

The impact of the U.S. cotton policy depends on several interrelated factors: how input subsidies interact with producer price supports, producer price expectations, and the extent to which price supports are decoupled from production. Cotton subsidies have a direct impact on world cotton prices, depending on the extent to which price supports are coupled to production. At one extreme, there is a price impact of 12.4% when producers make decisions at the loan rate, but the average price impact is 20.9% when producers make decisions based on the target price. Results are presented for intermediate cases of decoupling.

International markets for the majority of agricultural commodities are extremely complex. They include public and private traders along with influences from domestic and international government policies. In recent years, the United States has experienced a decline in the market share in two of its major agricultural exports—rice and wheat. For example, at one time the United States had roughly 45 percent of the world wheat market; but, by the end of 1985, its share had dropped below 40 percent. Also, in terms of rice, the United States market share has dropped from 25 percent to below 20 percent.

The 1999 round of trade talks in Seattle, Washington got off to a rather shaky start; in fact, it may be several years before new trade talks will be held. Many special-interest groups, including environmentalists and labor unions, were successful in scuttling these trade talks. In addition, agriculture's role and position were not clearly stated. This paper deals specifically with key agricultural issues surrounding future progress in trade talks. These comments integrate the central themes covered by the several authors who participated in the session entitled “The Millenium Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations.” My discussion illustrates some of the outstanding issues which must be dealt with before significant progress will be made towards freer trade in agriculture.

The increase in energy prices between 2004 and 2007 has several potential consequences for aggregate agriculture in the U.S. We estimate the derived input demand elasticities for energy as well as capital, labor, and materials using the differential supply formulation. Given that the derived input demand for energy is inelastic, it is more price-responsive than the other inputs. The results also indicate that the U.S. aggregate agricultural supply function is responsive to energy prices.

This paper considers how the welfare of U.S. sugar producers can be affected by the use of production controls in the presence of rising sugar imports and falling sugar prices, taking into account the negative externalities associated with U.S. sugar production. Even if production controls are used, producer welfare can be affected negatively under rising imports.

This article analyzes the impact of removing the U.S. tobacco program in both a partial and general welfare economics framework. In a partial-equilibrium framework, a consumer tax-funded quota buyout can result in producer gains, consumer losses, net losses resulting from higher prices, and deadweight losses. In a general-equilibrium framework, society can gain from the buyout resulting from considerable potential savings from reduced healthcare costs attributable to a reduction in smoking. Additionally, we present a model that addresses the addictive qualities of tobacco while considering the effects of the quota buyout. We also conclude that another possible effect of the buyout is an increase in worker productivity because employees who are able to quit smoking reduce the amount of smoking-related sick days taken.

As part of efforts to restore the Everglades, in 2008, Governor Crist of Florida proposed the acquisition of 187,000 acres of land from the U.S. Sugar Corporation (U.S. Sugar) for this purpose, but the final purchase in August 2010 totaled only 26,800 acres. This article presents the history behind the alternatives, including the buyout of U.S. Sugar land, to improve Florida's water quality and the health of the Everglades. To determine the benefits and costs of several of the U.S. Sugar land buyout proposals, a spatial price equilibrium model of the U.S. sugar market is developed. Within this framework, all the benefit-cost ratios calculated show that the benefits are less than the costs. Our analysis uses the concept of an Environmental Equivalent, which is the dollar amount of environmental benefits needed from the Everglades restoration or water quality projects to generate benefits that are as great as or greater than its costs. Also, we consider, within the context of ex ante vs. ex post benefit-cost analysis, the developments to clean up the Everglades since the U.S. Sugar land purchase.

Policy analysis is complicated by the myriad of benefits and costs generated by the use of natural resources. This study develops three benefits that must be considered in the granting of a consumptive use permit for water filed by Adena Springs Ranch, east of Ocala, Florida. This ranch is hoping to expand into grass-fat beef; but to do so, it needs additional water for irrigation. Specifically, our analysis considers the potential gain from the ranch, the potential negative effect on existing permit holders and environmental uses of water, and the possible positive value generated by the increased surface flow for other recreational users in eastern Marion County.

We provide a theoretical and empirical comparison of two historic production quota buyouts: the 2002 US Peanut Quota Buyout and the 2004 US Tobacco Quota Buyout. Producer compensation under the US Peanut Quota Buyout came from the treasury while the US Tobacco Buyout was paid for by a consumer tax (i.e., tobacco tax). Given these two buyouts, an important question arises: How does the method of compensation affect distribution and efficiency? Producers, consumers, and society favor a treasury buyout (TB) for several reasons. Producers are compensated considerably more under a TB, consumers are not burdened with the charge of funding the buyout, and society does not face additional efficiency losses due to the buyout.

Benefit-cost (B/C) analysis must take into account the distributional effects from a policy or program change. To highlight this, we focus on the theory of production quota buyouts within a B/C framework. As an empirical application, we provide evidence on the distributional effects of the U.S. government buyout of the peanut program in 2002, where production quotas were key ingredients. Two approaches to producer compensation under the buyout are discussed: (1) value of quota approach and (2) gains from quota approach. In the peanut quota program buyout, the U.S. government chose the value of quota approach. Both consumers and producers were made better off as a result of the buyout, and there was a net gain in efficiency. If the government had chosen the gains from quota approach instead, government expenditures and producer gains would have been lower, and consumer benefits would have remained unchanged. Under either approach, the B/C ratios calculated for the government quota buyout are almost identical.

The possibility of preference reversals according to the Kaldor-Hicks (KH) criterion in benefit-cost analysis has concerned economists since Scitovsky (1941) first published his results. Lawyers and philosophers have argued that the potential of reversals calls the use of benefit-cost analysis into question, implying elimination of its use. We demonstrate that reversals occur only with inferior goods in the case of static production possibilities and that reversals occur under changing production possibilities only when production possibilities frontiers cross, which is a myopic characterization that ignores practical cases of global production possibilities.