Search

We investigate the nature of crop yield systemic risk and its implications for farmers' area yield insurance choices. A theory‐grounded, normalized measure of systemic risk, R2, is developed and made amenable to empirical analysis through the logit link. The measure is estimated on a large‐scale, unit‐level corn yield dataset. We find that systemic risk explains less than half of total unit yield variability on average, suggesting that the risk management effectiveness of area yield insurance is low. By relating natural resource endowments with systemic risk, we find that more excessive heat and drought events lead to larger while more excessive precipitation events lead to smaller systemic risk. We then study whether current area yield insurance subsidy rates provide farmers with sufficient subsidy transfers to compensate for the uncovered risk exposure associated with area yield insurance. A new concept, the threshold relative area subsidy rate (TRASR), quantifies a lower bound on the ratio of area yield insurance subsidy rate over individual yield insurance subsidy rate below which risk‐averse farmers should always prefer individual yield insurance to area yield insurance. The calibrated TRASR values indicate that current area yield insurance subsidy rates discourage farmers from choosing area yield insurance over individual yield insurance, especially at low area yield insurance coverage levels. We also find that TRASR is positively correlated with systemic risk at the unit‐level of analysis, suggesting that farmers who like area yield insurance's risk management features will dislike its transfer implications and vice versa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Wade Brorsen Robert P. King John Loomis Thomas Reardon 2015 Jayson L. Lusk J. Edward Taylor James M. MacDonald Ariel Dinar C. Peter Timmer Alan L. Olmstead 2016 Klaus W. Deininger Jikun Huang Madhu Khanna John A. Miranowski JunJie Wu 2017 Harry M. Kaiser Damona Doye Philip Garcia Mario J. Miranda Robert J. Myers 2018 George Norton Jill McCluskey John Beghin Marcel Fafchamps Thomas Jayne 2019 Mary Bohman Kevin Boyle Matin Qaim Ian Sheldon Wallace Tyner 2020 Awudu Abdulai Shenggen Fan David Just William Masters Scott Swinton 2021 Ralph Christy Will Martin Alfred Parks Timothy Richards Jutta Roosen 2022 Keith Coble Craig Gundersen Ashok Mishra Rudy Nayga Brian Roe Melinda Smale. [Extracted from the article]

Wade Brorsen Robert P. King John Loomis Thomas Reardon 2015 Jayson L. Lusk J. Edward Taylor James M. MacDonald Ariel Dinar C. Peter Timmer Alan L. Olmstead 2016 Klaus W. Deininger Jikun Huang Madhu Khanna John A. Miranowski JunJie Wu 2017 Harry M. Kaiser Damona Doye Philip Garcia Mario J. Miranda Robert J. Myers 2018 George Norton Jill McCluskey John Beghin Marcel Fafchamps Thomas Jayne 2019 Mary Bohman Kevin Boyle Matin Qaim Ian Sheldon Wallace Tyner 2020 Awudu Abdulai Shenggen Fan David Just William Masters Scott Swinton 2021 Ralph Christy Will Martin Alfred Parks Timothy Richards Jutta Roosen. [Extracted from the article]

Production and use of energy have figured prominently in environmental studies and sciences (ESS) for many years, and it is particularly relevant to enduring themes, such as climate change, environmental justice, ecosystem disruption, and the study of natural resources. Despite its acknowledged centrality, relatively few ESS courses have delved into the intricacies of energy in a broad interdisciplinary framework. This paper encourages the development and improvement of such courses but recognizes that ESS faculty will have to select topics and resources to match their own abilities and interests and the needs of their students. The paper (a) proposes a framework for conceptual content and (b) suggests numerous resources organized in 5 categories and 17 subcategories. Each subcategory has an explanation of its role in the larger picture about energy, and each resource has a brief annotation about its content and utility. Future work on energy in ESS should address pedagogical techniques, different ways of integrating perspectives from different disciplines, and the needs of specific subsets of ESS courses and programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

US crop insurance is subsidized to encourage producers to participate and reduce their risk exposure. However, what has been the impact of these subsidies on insurance demand and crop acres planted? Using a simultaneous system of two equations, we quantify both insurance participation and acreage response to subsidized crop insurance for cotton-producing counties across the US at the national and regional levels. We also quantify the impact of both the realized rate of return and the expected subsidy per pound, plus the combined effects of expected yield and price while accounting for the adoption of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) technology and other factors. Results show that both the rate of return and the expected subsidy per unit of production have a statistically significant and positive effect on the percentage of arable acres planted. Furthermore, the marginal effect of expected price on insurance participation is much more significant for low-than high-yield counties. Results indicate that not all regions respond the same to subsidized crop insurance and that subsidies should be based on dollars per expected unit of production rather than expected production to be less distorting. Overall, US cotton acreage response is estimated to be inelastic (0.58) to insurance participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drought is a perennial and long-term risk that can negatively affect the farm economy through lower yields, loss of crops, reduced farm revenues, and lower sales for farm suppliers. As risks from climate change mount, understanding how drought will affect farmers across the country has become even more important. Drought risk can vary by region, crop type, and production method, and may disproportionately affect some farmers more than others. Although many farmers have crop insurance to protect against losses, insurance does not cover all of their crop's value, and even insured farmers face losses from drought. These losses can negatively affect farm finances, resulting in financial strain that may spill over into the broader agricultural economy. David Rodziewicz and Jacob Dice analyze the relationship between county-level drought exposure and direct farmer losses (specifically, crop insurance deductibles) from 2000 to 2019. They find that farmer losses from drought vary by crop type: although losses rise steadily along with drought intensity for corn and wheat, losses spike noticeably in extreme drought for soybeans. These losses represent an economically relevant share of crop production values: farmer losses from extreme drought can reach 20 percent of production value for corn and wheat and 35 percent for soybeans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Murray Reed Benedict Harold O. Carter William G. Murray Colin A. Carter. [Extracted from the article]

The article lists the fellows of the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association (AAEA) from 1957 to 2016 including Thomas Nixon Carver, Bushrod Warren Allin and Joseph Ackerman.

The article lists the fellows of the agriculture organization Agricultural & Applied Economics Association (AAEA) from 1957 to 2014 including Asher Hobson, Karl Brandt, and John F. Booth.

Agriculture is the largest water user in the West, and it will play a central role in balancing water supplies with competing water demands in light of climate change. Water resources that are already over allocated face competing demands from growing urban populations, unresolved tribal water claims, and for maintenance of riparian habitats. While many believe we can meet these demands by reallocating water from agriculture, climate change complicates this calculus. Warmer temperatures and longer droughts will reduce regional water supplies and increase agricultural water demands, making transfers more costly. Hydrological-economic modeling studies suggest agricultural water use will decline, leaving urban use relatively unchanged. Although this agriculture-to-urban reallocation of water is often treated primarily as an engineering problem, many legal and institutional barriers exist to large-scale water transfers. Technological fixes to conserve and transfer agricultural water to other uses will likely fail to facilitate climate adaptation unless changes in water management institutions, policies, and economic incentives accompany those technological fixes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to use simulation analysis to assess farmer choice between crop insurance and supplemental revenue options as proposed during development of the Agricultural Act of 2014. Design/methodology/approach – The certainty equivalent of wealth is used to rank farm choices and assess the effects of supplemental revenue options on the crop insurance plan and coverage level chosen by the producer under a range of farm attributes. The risk-reducing effectiveness of the select programs is also examined through their impact on the farm revenue distribution. The dependence structure of yield and prices is modeled by applying copula techniques on historical data. Findings – Farm program supplemental revenue programs generally have no effect on crop insurance choices. Crop insurance supplemental revenue programs typically reduce crop insurance coverage at high coverage levels. An individual plan of crop insurance combined with a supplemental revenue insurance plan may substitute for incumbent area crop insurance plans. Originality/value – The analysis provides insights into farmers’ possible choices by focussing on alternative crops and farm attributes and extensive scenarios, using current data, crop insurance plans and programs contained in the 2014 Farm Bill and related bills. The results should be of value to policy officials and producers in regards to the design and use of risk management tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We theoretically a farmer’s optimal use of area and individual crop insurance when area and individual losses are positively but imperfectly correlated. If premium rates for both plans are actuarially fair, the farmer will demand full individual insurance and no area insurance. If area insurance is free and individual insurance is offered at an actuarially fair rate, area insurance replaces a portion of individual insurance demand. If individual insurance is offered as a wrap around the area plan at an actuarially fair rate and area insurance is free, the farmer will demand excess individual insurance and some area insurance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the history of Agricultural and Applied Economics Association (AAEA) Research Awards. It states that the AAEA started its research awards for the best journal article in the "Journal of Farm Economics (JFE)" in 1945 and was stopped in 1948 for they were unable to find a volunteer to lead the selection committee for the 1948 award. Furthermore, after deliberations and solicitations to establish an award fund, the AAEA began to resume its awards program in 1950.

Since 1980, the principal form of crop loss assistance in the United States has been provided through the Federal Crop Insurance Program. The Federal Crop Insurance Act of 1980 was intended to replace disaster programs with a subsidized insurance program that farmers could depend on in the event of crop losses. Crop insurance was seen as preferable to disaster assistance because it was less costly and hence could be provided to more producers, was less likely to encourage moral hazard, and less likely to encourage producers to plant crops on marginal lands. Despite substantial growth in the program, the crop insurance program has failed to replace other disaster programs as the sole form of assistance. Over the past 20 years, producers received an estimated $15 billion in supplemental disaster payments in addition to $22 billion in crop insurance indemnities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Analyzes policy changes in Argentina and Brazil to determine their expected impacts on the United States (U.S.) soybean complex. Result of the expansion of soybean production and marketing capacity in Argentina and Brazil; Effect of policy changes made in Argentina and Brazil on their competitive position relative to the U.S.

Analyzes the effects of dollar depreciation on United States agricultural prices and income. Impact of dollar's depreciation on agricultural exports and export related income.

The article lists the fellows of the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association (AAEA) which include John Donald Black, Willard Wesley Cochrane and Katherine Reichelderfer Smith.

The article presents a list of fellows of the organization Agricultural & Applied Economics Association (AAEA) from 1957 to 2018, including Mordecai J. B. Ezekiel, Varden Fuller, and Damona Doye.

The article lists the fellows of the "American Journal of Agricultural Economics" from 1957-2013 including John Donald Black, Joseph Ackerman and George E. Brandow.

The article presents a list of Fellows from 1957-2012 of Agricultural & Applied Economics Association (AAEA) including Joseph W. Glauber, Helen H. Jensen, and Ron C. Mittelhammer.

The article list the names of the people awarded fellowship from 1957 to 2011 including John Donald Black, Oscar B. Jesness and John F. Booth.

The article lists the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association (AAEA) fellows from 1957-2010, including John Donald Black in 1957, Joseph Ackerman in 1964, and David Hennessy in 2010.

BRUCE A. BABCOCK, COLIN A. CARTER and ANDREW SCHMITZ Both taxpayer subsidies to U.S. wheat producers and domestic deadweight losses increased as a result of the U.S. wheat program adopted [...]