Crop insurance: A barrier to conservation adoption?

Midwest corn producers face inherent risks in their daily operations and incorporate risk-management strategies to reduce uncertainty; among these, crop insurance has dominated the agricultural landscape for decades. Previous research on conservation adoption has primarily examined the impact of individual-level characteristics on adoption, yet little is known about the impact of external factors, such as crop insurance. Using a mixed-methods approach, we conducted semi-structured interviews and a multi-state survey to determine if crop insurance requirements limit cover crops and/or conservation tillage adoption for Midwest corn producers. Our findings indicate that crop insurance requirements are not a barrier to adoption. Rather, crop insurance and conservation practices serve unique - not contradictory - roles in Midwest producers' operations and are used simultaneously. Future research should continue to identify and seek solutions for external barriers to broadly increase adoption rates.

Why metrics matter: evaluating policy choices for reactive nitrogen in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

Despite major efforts, the reduction of reactive nitrogen (Nr) using traditional metrics and policy tools for the Chesapeake Bay has slowed in recent years. In this article, we apply the concept of the Nitrogen Cascade to the chemically dynamic nature and multiple sources of Nr to examine the temporal and spatial movement of different forms of Nr through multiple ecosystems and media. We also demonstrate the benefit of using more than the traditional mass fluxes to set criteria for action. The use of multiple metrics provides additional information about where the most effective intervention point might be. Utilizing damage costs or mortality metrics demonstrates that even though the mass fluxes to the atmosphere are lower than direct releases to terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, total damage costs to all ecosystems and health are higher because of the cascade of Nr and the associated damages, and because they exact a higher human health cost. Abatement costs for reducing Nr releases into the air are also lower. These findings have major implications for the use of multiple metrics and the additional benefits of expanding the scope of concern beyond the Bay itself and support improved coordination between the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts while restoring the Chesapeake Bay.