Agricultural Policy: Pre‐ and Post‐Fair Act Comparisons
Agricultural Policy: Pre‐ and Post‐Fair Act Comparisons
复制标题
农业政策：公平法案前后的比较
DOI：
10.1002/9780470390375.ch2
复制
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
B. Gardner
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
B. Gardner
1996年的《公平法》是农业政策的一个新的开端，它规定了固定的付款，没有土地面积预留，避免了CCC商品库存，为向市场农业过渡提供了一种可能的手段。一些人现在认为《公平法案》已经失败，理由是联邦政府花费太多，而与此同时，这些支出并没有有效地针对最需要帮助的情况和人群。本文分析了1999-2000年公平法案商品项目的福利经济学。虽然公平交易并不是一个最好的政策范例，但就净社会效益而言，它比之前的目标价格和减少种植面积的方法有所改进。
The 1996 FAIR Act was a novel departure in farm policy, with fixed payments, absence of acreage set-asides, and avoidance of CCC commodity stockpiles that provide a possible means of transition to a market-based agriculture. Some now argue that the FAIR Act has failed, on the grounds that the federal government has spent too much, while at the same time this spending is not effectively targeted at situations and people where help is most needed. This paper analyzes the welfare economics of FAIR Act commodity programs in 1999-2000. While the FAIR has not been a sterling example of policy at its finest, in terms of net social benefit it is an improvement over the target price and acreage reduction approach which preceded it.