This paper investigates farmers’ incentives to participate voluntarily in carbon offset markets when environmental credit stacking is allowed, that is, farmers can stack water quality credits with carbon credits. The implications of stacking on additionality of environmental services in interlinked markets, market participation rates, and market equilibrium prices are analysed by developing a conceptual framework of environmental credit stacking, which is applied with data estimates for the US Corn Belt. Analysis shows that credit stacking increases farmers’ participation in carbon offset markets, and that such increased participation provides additionality in environmental service provision. It is further shown that ecosystem markets are interlinked so that credit price changes in one market will shift credit supply in another market, thus affecting equilibrium prices. Empirical application of the framework shows that provision of CO2-eq offsets through reductions of nitrogen application or through the establishment of green set-asides is not profitable without water quality credits. A conversion from conventional tillage and reduced tillage to no-till is profitable in some cases, although current low carbon offset prices and transaction costs have a significant negative impact on the number of participating parcels. When farmers are allowed to stack water quality credits the profitability of carbon sequestration practices increases. Reduced nitrogen application levels becomes a profitable option and 21% of field parcels - representing 4.6 million acres- participate in the market with water quality credit prices at base levels of USD 3/lb for N and USD 4/lb for P. The establishment of green set-aside and streamside buffer strips becomes profitable in the lower productivity and highly erodible lands with base prices of nutrient credits. If water quality trading markets are small then high participation rates among farmers may result in an oversupply of nutrient credits and as a consequence equilibrium credit prices and farmers’ credit revenue would decrease.
Environmental Co‑benefits and Stacking in Environmental Markets
Policy paper
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Abstract
In the same series
-
15 June 202656 Pages
-
3 June 202620 Pages
-
17 February 202673 Pages
-
Working paper
Economic analysis, literature findings and synthesis
28 May 202590 Pages -
Working paper
Impacts on the triple challenge and cost‑benefits analysis
22 May 202527 Pages -
Working paper
A literature review on policy effectiveness
9 May 202547 Pages -
Working paper
Case study of the Australian beef and wheat sectors
2 April 202580 Pages
Related publications
-
15 June 202656 Pages
-
Report
Framework, indicator methodology and results
29 October 202575 Pages -
Working paper
Reinforcing global food markets
1 August 202549 Pages