ACRE 2.0: What Changes Will Have To Be Included?

What is in this article?:

More About:

Survey findings

Among their findings:

  • Initial farmer plans to switch to ACRE in 2009 were primarily driven by producer perceptions of whether or not ACRE would pay more than existing programs and whether or not it would provide more risk protection.
  • Planning to stay with existing programs in 2009 and possibly switching to ACRE later was driven more by producer risk aversion and perceptions about the effect of yield and price variability on income risk in the coming years.
  • Membership in organizations such as National Farmers Union, National Farmers Organization and the Grange was consistently and strongly associated with intending to stay with existing programs in 2009.
  • Consistent state and crop effects were also found. Texas and Wisconsin producers were more likely to plan to wait and possibly switch to ACRE later.
  • Cotton growers consistently and strongly intended to stay with existing programs in 2009, likely due to the large “cost” of giving up the relatively larger direct payments for cotton and price expectations that made counter-cyclical payments more likely.
  • The ACRE decision was clearer for farmers focused on some crops (e.g., cotton and wheat).
  • The fact that many producers did not follow recommendations – to sign up for ACRE because expected returns would exceed returns from traditional programs – runs contrary to the often accepted notion that producers are simply rent seeking in farm program participation.

Summary

If Congress includes another version of ACRE in the 2012 Farm Bill, several changes may have to be made to attract more producer participation. Choices of programs lead farmers to stick with the direct payment program they knew. Farm organizations may need to be included in the sign-up process, instead of just Extension economists, and the program needs to treat all commodities equally.

 

Read the article at farmgateblog.com.

Discuss this Article 2

MC Hammer (not verified)
on Aug 17, 2011

Since 13% of the eligible acres are enrolled in ACRE, can we not just admit the program is a failure? For 2012 Farm Bill, it appears 90% certain that direct payments will end or be severely reduced. The ACRE program depended on the producer giving up 20% of their direct payment, if these go toward zero, then ACRE has to pull $$ away from other programs to be viable. Let's end ACRE and try to preserve the crop insurance premium subsidy at the current level. Let the direct payment chips fall where they may...

Mike Geske (not verified)
on Aug 30, 2011

I would submit that ACRE does treat all commodities equally. Past programs may have not. Cotton, for example, does not consider ACRE as beneficial because cotton has more to give up. ACRE is based on olympic yield history and average prices received. This is not commodity discriminatory.

Cotton may have legitimate historical reasons to have additional market protections. I am not making a personal judgment on that argument.

The reason most farmers didn't sign up was because they had to trade a sure thing (direct payments) for an unlikely thing (ACRE payments). It is difficult to trigger an ACRE payment when you must have both a statewide average loss plus an individual farm loss.

ACRE has the potential, with a few "tweaks", to be a good farm program, especially considering the expected cuts in traditional programs.

Post new comment
Sign In or register to use your Corn and Soybean Digest ID
(optional)

Newsletter Signup

Continuing Education Courses
New Course

Accredited for 2 hours/CCA Soil & Water credits. The 2,000 member...

This online CE course details sound mechanical irrigation design and management practices to...
Keeping crop protection chemicals on the crop for which they are intended has been a...
Connect With Us