Rent-Seeking in Noxious Weed Regulations: Evidence from US States



Table 3. Estimates of Cross-State Weed Regulatory Congruence, 2002

Slope Coefficients a

Sign of
Dissimilarity

List 1
NWS

List 2
NWS-Prohibited

List 3
NWS-Restricted

List 4

NW

I1. Average Temperature

Negative

6.0192*

77.9172**

-22.3952**

27.6193**

.

(3.0452)

.

(4.3315)

.

(3.3327)

.

(5.5819)

Positive

-97.3348**

-39.7359**

-86.9851**

-29.2558**

(4.5406)

(7.2631)

(4.9156)

(8.3285)

I2. Average Precipitation

Negative

10.7105**
(0.6691)

6.9771**

(0.8961)

5.4450**

(0.6867)

12.7726**
(1.0705)

Positive

-17.9395**

-18.6396**

-28.2771**

2.0383

(1.8217)

(2.6990)

(2.0377)

(3.1967)

I3. Variance of Temperature

Negative

0 0024

-0 0064*

0 0081*

-0 0162**

.

(0.0035)

.

(0.0037)

.

(0.0041)

.

(0.0060)

Positive

-6.5445**

-6.7927**

-6.3753**

-9.3485**

(1.5217)

(2.2661)

(1.6075)

(2.4415)

I4. Variance of Precipitation

Negative

0 0000

-0 0000

0 0001*

-0 0001

.

(0.0000)

.

(0.0000)

.

(0.0000)

.

(0.0000)

Positive

-5.6056**

-18.1827**

-4.0619*

-7.5137**

(1.4838)

(2.2530)

(1.5871)

(2.5831)

I5. Land Share Index

Negative

0.0280

0.0421

0.0071

-0.1023

(0.0234)

(0.0393)

(0.0218)

(0.0682)

Positive

0.0213

0.0377

0.0058

0.0230

(0.0281)

(0.0473)

(0.0263)

(0.0946)

I6. Water Share Index

Negative

0 2331

0 4933**

0 1009

0 0644

.

(0.1419)

.

(0.1867)

.

(0.1687)

.

(0.4540)

Positive

-0.1704

-0.6096*

-0.0178

0.0195

(0.1149)

(0.1544)

(0.1375)

(0.3803)

I7. Soil Share Index

Negative

-0 0481

-0 2558

0 0787

-0 5541

.

(0.1862)

.

(0.2809)

.

(0.2197)

.

(0.3862)

Positive

-0.0186

0.4315

-0.3601

0.1504

(0.1613)

(0.24151)

(0.1876)

(0.3390)

A1. Field Crop Land Share

Negative

4 6134**

8 9766**

4 3584**

5 9742**

.

(1.3560)

.

(1.9970)

.

(1.3247)

.

(1.7632)

Positive

-11.9382**

1.2836

-15.6365**

1.6604

(2.5060)

(3.7752)

(2.7747)

(3.9808)

A2. Irrigated Land Share

Negative

0 0254**

-0 0297

0 0577**

0 0135

.

(0.0098)

.

(0.0163)

.

(0.0117)

.

(0.0154)

Positive

-5.2458**

-3.3891

-1.2897

-4.6188*

(1.3962)

(2.0586)

(1.5069)

(2.3250)

ωc: Lobby of Consumer

Negative

-0.0626

0.0272

-0.0468

0.2804

.

(0.0324)

.

(0.0499)

.

(0.0362)

.

(0.1814)

Positive

-3.1981*

0.4738

-0.4750

-7.5734**

(1.5602)

(2.2480)

(1.7143)

(2.5308)

ωs: Lobby of Seed Industry

Negative

-0.0235

-0.0631**

0.0241

-0.0576**

.

(0.0158)

.

(0.0218)

.

(0.0178)

.

(0.0190)

Positive

-1.7488

-1.6051

1.8992

3.1139

(1.4492)

(2.1602)

(1.5447)

(2.3757)

ωm: Lobby of Commodity

Negative

0.4684**

0.2360

0.6222**

-0.7174**

Producer

(0.1139)

(0.1649)

(0.1260)

(0.2241)

Positive

-3.7354*

7.8416**

-3.4817*

-2.8600

(1.5426)

_________(2.3017)

_________(1.6396)

(2.5521)

** and * denote significance at the 1% and 5% level, respectively; number in parenthesis is standard error.

aI1 through I7 indicate ecological dissimilarity indexes, A1 and A2 are agronomic dissimilarity indexes, and ωk,
k=c,s,m, denote lobbying dissimilarity indexes.

29



More intriguing information

1. Crime as a Social Cost of Poverty and Inequality: A Review Focusing on Developing Countries
2. Linkages between research, scholarship and teaching in universities in China
3. The name is absent
4. Fortschritte bei der Exportorientierung von Dienstleistungsunternehmen
5. The name is absent
6. Effort and Performance in Public-Policy Contests
7. The name is absent
8. THE AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS LABORATORY
9. Une Gestion des ressources humaines à l'interface des organisations : vers une GRH territoriale ?
10. The name is absent