SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS DECEMBER, 1973 FARM PROGRAMS, PESTICIDE USE, AND SOCIAL COSTS*

Environmentalists attack agricultural pesticides substituting pesticides for cropland and to estimate because of adverse drift effects during application, effects of alternative farm programs, an aggregate run-off into streams and persistence in the production function for agriculture is useful. From environment. The Environmental Protection Agency this function the estimated marginal rate of (EPA) has banned DDT and currently is considering substitution of cropland for pesticides gives an cancellation of its registration of mirex, 2,4,5,-T, and indication of the change in pesticide use for a given dieldrin [4]. change in cropland. Also, estimates of input costs and Emotionalism rather than economics appears to resource use can be made from such a function. be guiding environmental groups in their fight against An aggregate production function is estimated pesticides. As agriculture's pesticide use comes under for the 1965-1969 time period. The Cobb-Douglas more and more pressure from the public, U.S. farm functional form is used because of its previous use in programs are likely to come under attack because aggregate economic studies, ease of estimating they may have encouraged farmers to substitute parameters, and because provision for diminishing pesticides for cropland. The "farm program " for the factor returns and constant elasticity of factor past decade has restricted acres planted and substitution are reasonably consistent with reality