UVM Theses and Dissertations
Format:
Print
Author:
Kiesel, Laura Ann
Dept./Program:
Natural Resources
Year:
2010
Degree:
MS
Abstract:
The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) is a voluntary government program that was first authorized under the 1996 Farm Bill with the intention of abating the adverse environmental impacts associated with agriculture through the cost-sharing of conservation practices with small-and medium-scale farmers. In 2002, EQIP expanded eligibility to include large-scale Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported in 2006 that state agencies do not consistently allocate EQIP funding for its stated purpose of optimizing environmental benefits.
This thesis assessed the EQIP allocation process on a state-level to detect if there was a funding disparity between organic livestock farms that use prescribed grazing methods and registered CAFOs in New York, and to decipher if the findings of the U.S. GAO report are applicable to this case study. Relying on extensive literature review, this thesis tracks the transformation of the agricultural sector in the United States and the history and evolution of EQIP. From there, the program's subsidy distribution rates in New York over the two year time span of 2003 to 2005 are analyzed using both parametric and non-parametric statistics. Environmental inspection and compliance records of CAFOs provided by a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) database were reviewed to offer supplemental data on environmental quality. Finally, semi-structured interviews were conducted with government agents, non-profit representatives and livestock farmers identified as EQIP recipients using interview guide format.
Comparisons of EQIP subsidy rates received for 2003 through 2005 between medium-and large-scale CAFOs, and organic graziers and registered CAFOs, were all determined to be statistically significant. According to the EPA database, 44% of all CAFOs identified as EQIP recipients have never received a formal environmental inspection and 33% have no compliance data records available. However, omissions in data for subsidy recipients and environmental tracking dictate that these findings are not conclusive and cannot be extrapolated as representative of the population. A lack of rigorous or consistent environmental monitoring and tracking protocol in the state supports the hypothesis that the EQIP allocation process is not clearly linked to optimizing environmental benefits in New York.
Farmer interview participants generally supported the program as environmentally beneficial to their farm and the state, though many farmers were confused about the mission and purpose of EQIP, or could not initially determine their status as EQIP recipients. A lack of accessibility to EQIP application and allocation data and the presence of a complementary environmental assessment protocol, preclude determination of the achievement of environmental benefits associated with the implementation of the program. Additionally, misconceptions about EQIP as expressed by subsidy recipients indicate that the achievement of optimized environmental benefits may not be the consistent objective of approved EQIP projects, in turn compromising the intention of the program.
This thesis assessed the EQIP allocation process on a state-level to detect if there was a funding disparity between organic livestock farms that use prescribed grazing methods and registered CAFOs in New York, and to decipher if the findings of the U.S. GAO report are applicable to this case study. Relying on extensive literature review, this thesis tracks the transformation of the agricultural sector in the United States and the history and evolution of EQIP. From there, the program's subsidy distribution rates in New York over the two year time span of 2003 to 2005 are analyzed using both parametric and non-parametric statistics. Environmental inspection and compliance records of CAFOs provided by a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) database were reviewed to offer supplemental data on environmental quality. Finally, semi-structured interviews were conducted with government agents, non-profit representatives and livestock farmers identified as EQIP recipients using interview guide format.
Comparisons of EQIP subsidy rates received for 2003 through 2005 between medium-and large-scale CAFOs, and organic graziers and registered CAFOs, were all determined to be statistically significant. According to the EPA database, 44% of all CAFOs identified as EQIP recipients have never received a formal environmental inspection and 33% have no compliance data records available. However, omissions in data for subsidy recipients and environmental tracking dictate that these findings are not conclusive and cannot be extrapolated as representative of the population. A lack of rigorous or consistent environmental monitoring and tracking protocol in the state supports the hypothesis that the EQIP allocation process is not clearly linked to optimizing environmental benefits in New York.
Farmer interview participants generally supported the program as environmentally beneficial to their farm and the state, though many farmers were confused about the mission and purpose of EQIP, or could not initially determine their status as EQIP recipients. A lack of accessibility to EQIP application and allocation data and the presence of a complementary environmental assessment protocol, preclude determination of the achievement of environmental benefits associated with the implementation of the program. Additionally, misconceptions about EQIP as expressed by subsidy recipients indicate that the achievement of optimized environmental benefits may not be the consistent objective of approved EQIP projects, in turn compromising the intention of the program.