The political economy of state right to farm amendments: evidence from Missouri

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17811/ebl.11.3.2022.93-97

Keywords:

right-to-farm, state referendum, animal welfare, environmental economics

Abstract

Right-to-farm laws started in the 1970s. In 2014, Missouri residents voted on a right-to-farm constitutional amendment that gave farmers constitutional protection from nuisance suits related to agricultural production. The Amendment passed 50.12% to 49.88%. We use an empirical median voter model on county-level voting data to analyze the determinants of yes voting. We find that an increased presence of agricultural interests in a county as measured by head of cattle, acres planted, and % employed in agriculture were associated with a higher percentage of yes votes. Our results highlight the importance of widespread farm interests obtaining constitutional projections for farming.

Author Biography

Josh Hall, West Virginia University

Joshua Hall is an Associate Professor of Economics and Director of the Center for Free Enterprise in the College of Business and Economics at West Virginia University.

References

Adelaja, A., and K. Friedman. 1999. “Political Economy of Right-to-Farm.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 31(3), 565-579. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-agricultural-and-applied-economics/article/abs/political-economy-of-righttofarm/288BC45FAD49CC4B9F93EBA9FB6CD1F2

Bergstrom, J., and T. Centner, T. 1989. “Agricultural Nuisances and Right to Farm Laws: Implications of Changing Liability Rules.” Review of Regional Studies, 19(1), 23-30. https://rrs.scholasticahq.com/article/9210

Bock, M. 2020. “The First to Legalise: Demographic and Spatial Influences on Colorado Amendment 64.” Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice, 36(1), 25-40. https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bup/jpfpc/2021/00000036/00000001/art00002;jsessionid=480ulif60kng4.x-ic-live-01

Duke, J., and S. Malcolm. 2003. “Legal Risk in Agriculture: Right-to-Farm Laws and Institutional Change.” Agricultural Systems, 75(2-3), 295-303. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X02000719

Guffey, S. 2020. “The Median Voter Theorem and the Repeal of the Prohibition on Abortion in Ireland: An Analysis of the Passage of the Thirty-Sixth Amendment.” Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice, 36(1), 41-47. https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bup/jpfpc/2021/00000036/00000001/art00003

Hall, J., and S. Karadas. 2018. “Tuition Increases Geaux Away? Evidence from Voting on Louisiana’s Amendment 2.” Applied Economics Letters, 25(13), 924-927. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504851.2017.1386273?journalCode=rael20

Kuran, T. 1997. Private Truths, Public Lies: The Social Preferences of Preference Falsification. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Morgan, C., N. Widmar, M. Wilcox, and C. Croney. 2018. “Perceptions of Agriculture and Food Corporate Social Responsibility.” Journal of Food Products Marketing, 24(2), 146-162. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10454446.2017.1266550

Neto, A., C. Hodges, and H. Pyun. 2016. “Voting Dynamics and the Birth of State-owned Casinos in Kansas.” Economics Bulletin, 36(1), 329-336. https://ideas.repec.org/a/ebl/ecbull/eb-15-00771.html

Wadsworth, A. 2020. “Moore Religious Icons on State Property? Alabamians Pass Bill to Allow Overlap of Church and State.” Applied Economics Letters, 27(17), 1430-1433. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2019.1687837

Downloads

Published

2022-07-13

How to Cite

Russell, L., & Hall, J. (2022). The political economy of state right to farm amendments: evidence from Missouri. Economics and Business Letters, 11(3), 93-97. https://doi.org/10.17811/ebl.11.3.2022.93-97

Issue

Section

Policy Watch