Structural Conservation Practices in U.S. Corn Production: Evidence on Environmental Stewardship by Program Participants and Non-Participants

1). However, among program participants, most (about 70 percent) are from the higher-sales
farming-occupation farms (accounting for about 10 percent of all corn farms in the study area). The
average conservation program participation rate ranges from 9 percent for the retired/residential/-
lifestyle/low-sales farming occupation farms to 18 percent for higher-sales farms. These relatively
low participation rates underscore the importance of improving our understanding of the
characteristic differences between conservation program participants and non-participants.

While nearly 83 percent of corn acres for 2005 (in the 4-State study area) were associated
with farms that did not participate in conservation programs (on corn acres), farms growing corn
that did participate in such programs (on corn acres) differed in a number of important ways from
non-participant farms. In addition, differences in characteristic values are generally statistically
significant across the two farm-size classes we examined (table 1). Higher-sales farms among
program participants operated about 1,263 acres (on average), while similar type farms among non-
participants operated about 1,019 acres. The situation is similar for the retired/residential/lifestyle/-
low-sales farm-size classes, that is, acres operated were slightly larger for participants than for non-
participants, but even so, the farm sizes for both low-sales groups were much smaller (163 - 298
acres) than for higher-sales farms. However, participant corn farms generally owned more land
relative to the farmland they operated (a higher land-tenure rate), with retired/residential/lifestyle/-
low-sales farms among program participants with the highest tenure rates (at 92 percent).

From a 2005 farm financial perspective, non-participant farms (growing corn) were
generally less dependent on farm revenue from corn production across both farm-class types than
were participants. These non-participant farms also produced higher 2005 farm production value,
with both results suggesting greater farm diversification. On the other-hand, program participants

typology into two farm-size classes. For a detailed definition of the full ERS farm typology, see the ERS website:
http://www.ers.usda.goV/Briefing/FarmStructure/glossary.htm#typology .

<<   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >>

More intriguing information