Local and Regional Economic Impacts of Biofuel Development
Expanded processing of agricultural products in rural areas has been widely pursued as a strategy for rural economic development. By adding value to farm products before they leave the area, new processing plants can create new employment opportunities and generate economic spinoffs in rural areas that have experienced economic stagnation or decline as a result of long term trends of farm consolidation. In addition, farmer owned processing facilities provide a way for producers to integrate forward and capture potential profits from processing and marketing their products. Consequently, the expansion of agricultural processing in rural areas usually receives broad-based support from commodity groups, rural development interests, and state political leaders. In recent years, the most prevalent type of new agricultural processing ventures in the Midwest and Great Plains states has been corn ethanol plants. Like other types of agricultural processing, these biofuel ventures have generally received widespread support, and numerous studies have addressed their contributions to local or regional economies. However, while the methods employed have seemingly been quite similar, the findings have varied widely with the impacts attributed to ethanol development differing as much as ten-fold. The purpose of this paper is to (1) examine reasons why estimates of local or regional economic impacts of biofuel development may vary and (2) compare the economic impacts of corn-based ethanol production with those expected to be associated with cellulosic ethanol production.
The Viability of Harvesting Corn Cobs and Stover for Biofuel Production in North Dakota
This study examines the impact of stochastic harvest field time, corn cob and stover harvest technologies, increases in farm size, and alternative tillage practices on profit maximizing potential of corn cob and stover collection in North Dakota. Using three mathematical programming models, we analyze farmers’ harvest activities under 1) corn grain only harvest option, 2) simultaneous corn grain and cob harvest(one-pass) option 3) separate corn grain and stover harvest (two-pass) option. Under the first corn grain only option, farmers are able to complete harvesting corn grain and achieve maximum net income in a fairly short amount of time with existing combine technology. However, under the simultaneous corn grain and cob one-pass harvest option, our findings indicate that farmers generate lower net income as compared to the net income of corn grain only harvest option. This is due to the slowdown in combine harvest capacity as a consequence of attaching cob harvester to the back of combine. Under the third option of a two-pass harvest system, time allocation is the main challenge and our evidence shows that with limited harvest field time available, farmers find it optimal to allocate most of their time harvesting grain, and then proceed to bale stover if time permits at the end of harvest season. As farm size increases, farmers are especially challenged in finding time to harvest both corn grain and cobs/stover. We show that a small decrease in corn yield due to changes in tillage practice can result in a large decline in the net profit of harvesting corn grain and cobs/stover.
The Use of Qualitative Information in Macro-Economic Policy Analysis
The majority of macro-economic policy models takes for granted that conflicts among objectives can be assessed by means of a tradeoff analysis. Such tradeoffs imply that sacrifices and benefits of various impacts of decisions can be measured on a cardinal scale, so that a conventional macro-economic utility or welfare analysis can be applied.