\begin{frame}{Chapter II}
	\huge
	\bf{Policy Interactions of Water Conservation Programs.}
%	\bf{Policy Interactions of Water Conservation Programs. Is Efficiency Always Efficient?}

\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{frame}{Guiding Question}
	\Large
	How does Subdistrict 1 water management change the efficacy of federal payment for environmental services (PES) water conservation efforts?
\vfill
	\large
\onslide<2-> Staggered DiD study of the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) for Subdistrict 1 farms initiated in 2014. 
	\begin{itemize}
		\onslide<3->{\item{Effect from enrolled wells, neighboring wells, and selection in the program }}
		\onslide<4->{\item{The federal PES conserves 32\% less ground water. }}
		\onslide<5->{\item{Program costs rise by 29.5\%. }}
		\onslide<6->{\item{Pays the farmers most harmed by the pumping fee.}}
	\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Background}
\begin{frame}{CREP}
 Provides payments to fallow irrigated land in environmentally sensitive regions. The first contracts started in 2014.  \vfill
\onslide<2->{ \textbf{Goals}
			\begin{enumerate}
				\item{Enroll 40,000 acres of cropland}
				\item{Reduce water use by 60,060 acre-feet per year.}
				\item{Reduce erosion}
				\item{Increase native cover crops}
			\end{enumerate}
		}
		\vfill
\onslide<3-> {\textbf{Current Status}
			\begin{enumerate}
				\item{10,868 acres enrolled (27.1\% of goal)}
				\item{Estimate of 14,755 acre-feet saved a year (24.6\% of goal)}
			\end{enumerate}
		}
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
 \begin{frame}{CREP: Payments}
	 Different payments depending on contract length. Additional support from RGWCD and Sbd1.
	 \vfill
	\begin{columns}
		\begin{column}{0.5\textwidth}
		\textbf{Farm Service Agency (FSA) payments}
			\begin{enumerate}
				\item{15 year contract}
				\item{\$288 per acre per year}
				\item{\$300 per acre sign up bonus}
			\end{enumerate}
		\end{column}
		\begin{column}{0.5\textwidth}
		\textbf{Farm Service Agency (FSA) payments}
			\begin{enumerate}
				\item{Permanent retirement}
				\item{\$22 per acre per year}
				\item{\$100 per acre sign up bonus}
			\end{enumerate}
		\end{column}
	\end{columns}
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{frame}{CREP: Rules}
	\Large \textbf{Requirement}
			\begin{enumerate}
				\item{\(\frac{1}{2}\) acre-feet per acre applied}
				\item{Four years of irrigation between 2008 and 2013 }
				\item{\(\frac{1}{2}\) acre-feet per acre two years before application}
			\end{enumerate}
			\vfill
			\onslide<2>{Sbd1 pumping fee was \$45 per acre-foot in 2011, rasied to \$75 in 2012. \emph{Only one year with a high pumping fee in eligibility period}}
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{frame}{How can existing Sbd1 conservation affect a PES?}
	CREP can induce water savings directly through enrolled wells, or indirectly through the response of neighboring wells \citep{rouhirad2021}. 
	\vfill
	\onslide<2->{\textbf{Possible Effects}}
			\begin{itemize}
				\onslide<2->{\item{More wells enrolled (+)}}
				\onslide<3->{\item{Less water saved by enrolled wells (-)}}
				\onslide<4->{\item{Neighbouring wells change pumping (+) }}
				\onslide<5->{\item{Different wells enroll (+/-)}}
			\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Data}
\begin{frame}{Data}
	\begin{columns}
		\begin{column}{0.5\textwidth}
			\textbf{Colorado Hydrobase}
			\begin{itemize}
				\item{Well}
				\item{Ditch}
				\item{Crop}
			\end{itemize}
		\end{column}
		\begin{column}{0.5\textwidth}
			\textbf{Subdistrict 1 Annual Plan}
			\begin{itemize}
				\item{CREP enrollment}
				\item{Linked to legal parcels}
				\item{First fallow year}
				\item{Contract type}
			\end{itemize}
		\end{column}
	\end{columns}
	\vfill
	Calculated distance matrix between wells and ditches. Generated two by two mile grid for spatial clusters \citep{bester2011}.
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Econometrics}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{frame}{Econometrics: Subdistrict 1 effect on CREP well pumping}
\begin{equation*}\label{mainreg2}
	Y_{i,t}=\left(Sbd_i+CREP_i\right)\cdot(1+\sum_{s=1}^S(\theta_{s(i,t)}))+Ditch_{i}+County_{i}+\tau_{t}+\beta \cdot X_{i,t}+\epsilon_{i,t}
\end{equation*}
This is the same DiD model previously used but with a second term for a well that eventually enters CREP.
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{frame}{Econometrics: Subdistrict 1 effect on CREP enrolment}
Two steps are used to estimate the change in CREP efficacy due to changes in well enrolment. The number of wells enrolled changes the direct effect of CREP. The location of the enrolled wells changes which wells are neighbors that reduce groundwater. 
	\begin{enumerate}
		\item{Probit model predicting if a well enrollees in CREP based on attributes and response to the pumping fee}
		\item{Monte Carlo simulation of well enrolment location}
	\end{enumerate}
\end{frame}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{frame}{Econometrics: CREP and nearby water savings}
\begin{equation*}
	\label{EQ:SUNAB}
	\widehat{CREP\ ATT}_{g}=\frac{1}{|g|}\sum_{\ell \in g} \sum_{e}\hat{\Phi}_{e,\ell}\cdot\hat{\delta}_{\ell,e}
\end{equation*}
Where \emph{g} is the set of all lags \(\ell\). The final equation estimates the ATT, by the sum of cohort treatment effects weighted by the cohort sample share in and scaled by the number of periods in the set \(|\)\emph{g}\(|\) \citep{sun2021}.
\end{frame}
\subsection{Result}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\begin{frame}{Results Subdistrict 1 effect on CREP well pumping}
%	\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Chapter_II/Figures/Policy_Bar_Graph.jpeg}
%\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Results Subdistrict 1 effect on number of neighbor wells}
	\centering
	\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{Chapter_II/Figures/BOX_PLOT_WITH_RANDOM.pdf}
\end{frame}

\begin{frame}{Overall Change}
	\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Chapter_II/Figures/Policy_Bar_Graph.jpeg}
\end{frame}



