Misalignment in Carbon Credit Programmes: Insights From Producer Preferences for Cover Crop and No-Till Contracts

IF 2.4 3区 经济学 Q2 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY
Grant Edward Gardner, Gabriel S. Sampson, Shuoli Zhao
{"title":"Misalignment in Carbon Credit Programmes: Insights From Producer Preferences for Cover Crop and No-Till Contracts","authors":"Grant Edward Gardner,&nbsp;Gabriel S. Sampson,&nbsp;Shuoli Zhao","doi":"10.1111/1467-8489.70081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study examines the factors influencing producer adoption of cover cropping and no-till farming, two key carbon sequestration practices, within the context of voluntary carbon credit programmes (CCPs) in Kansas. Using a mixed-methods survey that combines discrete choice experiments with farm-level data from 370 producers, we estimate random-parameter latent class models to assess preferences over contract design, payment levels and agri-environmental constraints. Findings reveal substantial misalignments between current CCP structures and producer needs: nearly half of respondents consistently rejected all contract offers, while those most willing to enrol were often already using the promoted practices, raising concerns about the additionality of these initiatives. Key barriers include long contract durations, insufficient payments and agri-environmental limitations such as drought and wheat-based rotations. These results highlight the need for more flexible, regionally tailored carbon programmes and provide actionable insights for policymakers seeking to enhance the adoption and climate impact of agricultural carbon sequestration initiatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":55427,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"70 3","pages":"814-830"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8489.70081","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8489.70081","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examines the factors influencing producer adoption of cover cropping and no-till farming, two key carbon sequestration practices, within the context of voluntary carbon credit programmes (CCPs) in Kansas. Using a mixed-methods survey that combines discrete choice experiments with farm-level data from 370 producers, we estimate random-parameter latent class models to assess preferences over contract design, payment levels and agri-environmental constraints. Findings reveal substantial misalignments between current CCP structures and producer needs: nearly half of respondents consistently rejected all contract offers, while those most willing to enrol were often already using the promoted practices, raising concerns about the additionality of these initiatives. Key barriers include long contract durations, insufficient payments and agri-environmental limitations such as drought and wheat-based rotations. These results highlight the need for more flexible, regionally tailored carbon programmes and provide actionable insights for policymakers seeking to enhance the adoption and climate impact of agricultural carbon sequestration initiatives.

碳信用计划的错位:来自生产者对覆盖作物和免耕合同偏好的见解
本研究在堪萨斯州自愿碳信用计划(CCPs)的背景下,考察了影响生产者采用覆盖种植和免耕耕作这两种关键的碳封存做法的因素。使用混合方法调查,将离散选择实验与来自370个生产者的农场层面数据相结合,我们估计随机参数潜在类别模型,以评估合同设计,支付水平和农业环境约束的偏好。调查结果显示,当前CCP结构与制作人需求之间存在严重偏差:近一半的受访者始终拒绝所有合同提议,而那些最愿意加入的人通常已经在使用推广实践,这引起了对这些倡议的额外性的担忧。主要障碍包括合同期限长、付款不足和农业环境限制,如干旱和小麦轮作。这些结果突出表明,需要制定更灵活的、适合地区的碳计划,并为寻求加强农业碳封存倡议的采用和气候影响的政策制定者提供可操作的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
>24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics (AJARE) provides a forum for innovative and scholarly work in agricultural and resource economics. First published in 1997, the Journal succeeds the Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics and the Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, upholding the tradition of these long-established journals. Accordingly, the editors are guided by the following objectives: -To maintain a high standard of analytical rigour offering sufficient variety of content so as to appeal to a broad spectrum of both academic and professional economists and policymakers. -In maintaining the tradition of its predecessor journals, to combine articles with policy reviews and surveys of key analytical issues in agricultural and resource economics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书