The competition or rivalry for the use of water resources
among economic sectors of the Pacific Northwest and among geographical
regions of the western United States has intensified in recent
years. This rivalry and the long run prospects for water shortages
have increased the demand for research concerning the productivity
of this resource in alternative uses. This demand exists because the
distribution and use of water resources require investment which
typically comes from both public and private sources. Private and
public planning groups seek answers to questions regarding future
water resource development alternatives.
Agriculture has historically been a major user of water in the
Pacific Northwest. A substantial portion of total investment in water
resource development has also been, in agriculture. As a result water
use planners and decision making bodies are necessarily interested in water use in agriculture. The success of water resource planning
requires answers to questions regarding the value of the productivity
of water in all its major uses, including various aspects of water use
in agriculture.
Different aspects of water use in agriculture which are important
to decision makers include (1) the value productivity of various
kinds or types of water resource investments, (2) the value productivity
of water in various kinds of agricultural production in different
geographical areas, and (3) the returns to private and public investment
in agricultural water resources. This study was directed to
providing answers to these questions. Pacific Northwest agriculture
was studied from this viewpoint.
Agricultural water resources were classified as irrigation,
drainage, and water related Agricultural Conservation Program (ACP)
practices. These are the major classifications of water resources
in which investments are made in the Pacific Northwest.
Production function analysis was selected as a method of investigation.
Production functions were estimated for five areas or
subregions in the Pacific Northwest. These areas are composed of
counties with similar patterns of production. The Agricultural Census
was the primary data surce, supplemented by related U.S.
Department of Agriculture publications, and various state publications,
Ordinary least-squares regression (OLS) techniques were employed to derive the initial estimates of the parameters of the production
function models. Tests for detecting interdependence within
the independent variable set of the models revealed a considerable
degree of instability in the OLS parameter estimates. This condition
makes the OLS solutions (and various derivations) particularly vulnerable
to change from measurement error, poor model specification,
and equation form.
A prior information model was selected to explicitly include
available prior knowledge in the estimation process. The model selected
allows (1) tests of comparability of the two information sources
(prior and sample), (2) over-all contribution of prior information to
the new solution set, and (3) derivation of percentage contribution
of the two information sources to individual parameter estimates.
The results of the study indicate that no reliable estimates of
value of production from drainage and ACP were possible from the
sample information. Returns to irrigation were considered lower
than expected in two of the farming areas and higher than expected in
another. Estimated returns were high in the area which produces
primarily field crops (about nine dollars per acre foot). The area
has a small level of current irrigation development. Indications are
that irrigation development is probably beyond the optimum level in
the area where most large, projects have been developed in the past
(less than four dollars per acre foot). Future development would be most profitable (assuming equal development cost) in the dryland field crop area.
Estimated returns to other factor inputs indicate (1) low returns
to labor in two areas, (2) generally high returns to current operating
expenditures, and (3) low returns to machinery capital. Returns to
cropland were about as expected in two areas (five to seven percent)
but low in two other areas (about two percent). Indications are that
labor mobility should be increased in the area and that future land
development should be in the livestock-field crop and the field crop
areas rather than the coastal area or the west-central valley areas
(primarily the Willamette Valley). / Graduation date: 1972
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ORGSU/oai:ir.library.oregonstate.edu:1957/27091 |
| Date | 09 June 1971 |
| Creators | Holloway, Milton L. |
| Contributors | Stevens, Joe B. |
| Source Sets | Oregon State University |
| Language | en_US |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis/Dissertation |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds