|
|
 |
|
Sharing the Cost
Sharing the Cost: Evaluation of Federal Spending on Working Land Conservation
Sharing the Cost is a project the Soil and Water Conservation Society (SWCS) undertook with support from the Joyce Foundation. The objectives were (1) to produce a comprehensive description of current and past federal investment in conservation on privately owned working land and (2) to provide a basis for comparison of federal investment among conservation, environmental, and agricultural programs.
To read the final report, click here.
To view the preliminary findings, click here.
An Overview
Conservation Budget Functional Categories
| Research |
Basic and applied research that provides the scientific underpinning for effective design, installation, and maintenance of conservation systems. |
|
Scientific and technical support |
Translating basic and applied research into specific guidelines, practice standards, and recommendations for conservation systems planning, design, and implementation; transferring that information to technical advisors. |
|
Direct technical assistance |
Direct, one-on-one technical advice and assistance to landowners, communities, and units of local government for planning and implementing conservation systems on a site-specific basis. |
|
Land management and treatment
|
Financial assistance implementing conservation systems and keeping the land in food and fiber production. (e.g., EQIP). |
|
Land restoration and retirement
|
Financial assistance for taking agricultural land out of food and fiber production and restoring grassland, forest or wetland habitat, with restrictions on economic use of the restored acres. (e.g., CRP, WRP). |
Trends in USDA Conservation Spending
· USDA conservation spending—in nominal dollars—increased 243 percent from 1985 to 2000. Even in constant dollars, conservation spending increased by 123 percent.
· A single program—the Conservation Reserve Program —accounted for 80 percent of the increased conservation spending.
· Financial assistance for land restoration and retirement, in constant dollars, increased from $13 million in 1985 to $1.76 billion in 2000—an increase of 12,000 percent.
· Financial assistance for land management and treatment, in constant dollars, declined from $509 million in 1985 to $317 in 2000—a decrease of 38 percent.
· Investment in research, scientific and technical support, and direct technical assistance was flat—increasing in constant dollars by about 8 percent.
o Research—10 percent increase.
o Scientific and technical support—9 percent increase.
o Direct technical assistance—8 percent increase.
Trend in USDA Staff
· Capacity to support research, scientific and technical support, and direct technical assistance declined, despite a slight increase in spending.
· NRCS and ARS staff available to support research, scientific and technical support, and direct technical assistance declined.
o NRCS—cut 2,201 staff years (-16 percent).
o ARS—cut 500 staff years (-6 percent).
· FSA staff available to support programming increased between 1985 and 1995, then declined between 1995 and 2000. The net: an
increase of 1,586 staff years since 1985.
Trends in Emphasis
· In 1985, 60 percent of the conservation budget was spent on scientific and technical assistance—40 percent on financial assistance.
· In 2000, 29 percent of the conservation budget was spent on scientific and technical assistance—71 percent on financial assistance.
· In 1985, 97 percent of the conservation financial assistance budget was spent on land management and treatment and 3 percent on land restoration and retirement.
· In 2000, 15 percent of the conservation financial assistance budget was spent on land management and treatment and 85 percent on land restoration and retirement.
· The proportion of spending allocated among research, scientific and technical support, and direct technical assistance has remained constant.
|
