Can the panel approach account for long-run adaptation?. Thanks for asking! The short answer is…. “sometimes”. Here’s my aforepromised thread on this paper. 🧵.

RT @AJAE_AAEA: "Extreme weather events, climate expectations, and agricultural export dynamics" by @NesKjersti, @AleksSchaefer, @mattgamman….

3 takeaways:.– Agronomic models and observational analyses sometimes differ—using both is crucial. – Non-climatic barriers to DC remain important. – Double cropping is a valuable climate adaptation, not a standalone solution. 11/11.

We find a benefit of ~1% for a 2C warming. This is small… but not nothing. For context, our previous AJAE study ( found a 15% soy yield reduction from 2°C warming. Combining these,, we'd predict a 14% revenue (-15%+1%) drop for soy farmers. 10/11

We combine these 2 pieces (DC acreage effect + DC yield penalty) to generate estimates of the total “adaptive benefit” of DC. What’s an “adaptive benefit”? We define it as the total change in revenues that is attributable to a change in DC acreage resulting from a climate shift.

We estimate the DC “yield penalty” with a county-level panel analysis, regressing USDA soy yields (pooled across DC and single-crop acres) against the DC share, plus weather and county fixed effects. Our result: a 12% yield penalty. 8/11.

What do these estimates imply for farm revenues? To find out, we need to estimate how much double cropping affects soybean yields. DC soy typically has lower yields due to a shorter growing season and resource competition from wheat—estimates range from 5% to 25% lower. 7/11.

What do we find? We find that shifting to a warmer climate significantly increases DC share for cooler locations, has minimal effect for most regions, and can actually decrease DC share in the hotter locations. Predicted acreage changes for a 3°C warming scenario below. 6/11

First, we focus on the share of double-cropped soybeans, not acreage, to avoid bias from non-ag factors like urbanization. Second, we include extensive soil controls, as well as state fixed effects. 5/11.

We use a cross-sectional analysis because DC decisions depend on expectations of climate—not just last season's weather. We use CDL for DC crop choice and PRISM to compute climate variables. We address omitted variables in two ways: 4/11.

There’s a ton of this in Southern Illinois and Kentucky, but can be found in many parts of the Eastern US, mostly south of the 40° latitude. (That’s Interstate 70 for non-geographers). Can climate change help double cropping expand North? 3/11

Double cropping (or DC) winter wheat and soy is a cool system where farmers plant wheat in fall, harvest in spring, then immediately plant soybeans. If successful, they get two cash crop harvests in one year. Hence, "double." 2/11.

🧵A thread on this @AJAE_AAEA paper, joint with @ArielOrtizBobea and Pierre Mérel: Double cropping as an adaptation to climate change in the United States.

apricot orchard

Barley harvest in Khaibar, Pakistan

RT @hagertynw: (I think economists could benefit generally from thinking more about units! In physics EVERYTHING is about unit analysis, wh….

Emmanuel gives a nice overview of this paper, out this week in @JEEM_tweets. I think we're all starting to understand how important characterizing response heterogeneity is for climate impacts. This paper has a few caveats and suggestions along those lines.

A very brief piece on short- and longer-term drought management strategies, with Alan Ker and Molly Sears (@MollySears16).

A look at irrigation trends in Michigan from @SungminCheu and myself.

This piece relies heavily on the data and code made publicly available by Charles Taylor (@ctaylor463) and Hannah Druckenmiller in their recent paper on wetlands and flood damages.

In light of the Sackett vs. Environmental Protection Agency ruling, some data-driven musings on Michigan wetlands, floods, and property rights.