Is US farm sector debt underestimated? Evidence from equipment lending

IF 1.5 Q3 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY Agricultural Finance Review Pub Date : 2024-06-28 DOI:10.1108/afr-12-2023-0168
Brian Briggeman, Luke Byers, Jennifer Ifft, Ryan Kuhns, Noah Miller, Jisang Yu
{"title":"Is US farm sector debt underestimated? Evidence from equipment lending","authors":"Brian Briggeman, Luke Byers, Jennifer Ifft, Ryan Kuhns, Noah Miller, Jisang Yu","doi":"10.1108/afr-12-2023-0168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The growth of lending from nontraditional lenders may pose challenges for official US Department of Agriculture (USDA) farm sector debt estimates, but it is difficult to find data to assess official estimates. The purpose of this study is to examine whether debt provided by nontraditional lenders is accurately accounted for in official estimates.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>We compare traditional and nontraditional lending data from farm equipment lien collateral values and the USDA Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS). After analyzing trends in equipment lending implied by farm equipment lien data and ARMS, we estimate whether changes in farm equipment lien values predict changes in equipment debt reported in ARMS and whether lender type influences that relationship.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>We find that credit provided by nontraditional lenders is likely underreported in ARMS. Our econometric model shows that equipment debt volumes for nontraditional lenders are consistently lower than traditional loan volumes in ARMS across a variety of model specifications. We also find that an increase in lien values for nontraditional lenders is less likely to predict an increase in ARMS equipment debt volumes than an increase for traditional lenders.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>Official farm sector debt estimates may not fully account for nontraditional lenders.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This study demonstrates how the growth of nontraditional lending poses challenges for estimating US farm sector debt. We evaluate farm sector debt estimates and advance knowledge of the role of nontraditional lenders in farm equipment credit provision. The farm equipment lien dataset provides a rich source of novel data for research on local and national equipment debt and investment.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":46748,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Finance Review","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Finance Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/afr-12-2023-0168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The growth of lending from nontraditional lenders may pose challenges for official US Department of Agriculture (USDA) farm sector debt estimates, but it is difficult to find data to assess official estimates. The purpose of this study is to examine whether debt provided by nontraditional lenders is accurately accounted for in official estimates.

Design/methodology/approach

We compare traditional and nontraditional lending data from farm equipment lien collateral values and the USDA Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS). After analyzing trends in equipment lending implied by farm equipment lien data and ARMS, we estimate whether changes in farm equipment lien values predict changes in equipment debt reported in ARMS and whether lender type influences that relationship.

Findings

We find that credit provided by nontraditional lenders is likely underreported in ARMS. Our econometric model shows that equipment debt volumes for nontraditional lenders are consistently lower than traditional loan volumes in ARMS across a variety of model specifications. We also find that an increase in lien values for nontraditional lenders is less likely to predict an increase in ARMS equipment debt volumes than an increase for traditional lenders.

Practical implications

Official farm sector debt estimates may not fully account for nontraditional lenders.

Originality/value

This study demonstrates how the growth of nontraditional lending poses challenges for estimating US farm sector debt. We evaluate farm sector debt estimates and advance knowledge of the role of nontraditional lenders in farm equipment credit provision. The farm equipment lien dataset provides a rich source of novel data for research on local and national equipment debt and investment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国农业部门的债务被低估了吗?设备贷款的证据
目的非传统贷款人贷款的增长可能会给美国农业部(USDA)对农业部门债务的官方估算带来挑战,但很难找到数据来评估官方估算。本研究的目的是考察官方估算中是否准确考虑了非传统贷款人提供的债务。设计/方法/途径我们比较了来自农业设备留置权抵押品价值和美国农业部农业资源管理调查(ARMS)的传统和非传统贷款数据。在分析了农机设备留置权数据和 ARMS 所隐含的设备贷款趋势后,我们估计了农机设备留置权价值的变化是否会预测 ARMS 中报告的设备债务的变化,以及贷款人类型是否会影响这种关系。我们的计量经济模型显示,在各种模型规格中,非传统贷款人的设备债务额始终低于 ARMS 中的传统贷款额。我们还发现,非传统贷款人留置权价值的增加与传统贷款人留置权价值的增加相比,更不可能预测 ARMS 设备债务额的增加。原创性/价值本研究表明了非传统贷款的增长如何给美国农业部门债务的估算带来挑战。我们对农场部门债务估算进行了评估,并进一步了解了非传统贷款人在农场设备信贷提供中的作用。农场设备留置权数据集为地方和国家设备债务与投资研究提供了丰富的新数据来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Agricultural Finance Review
Agricultural Finance Review AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
18.80%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Agricultural Finance Review provides a rigorous forum for the publication of theory and empirical work related solely to issues in agricultural and agribusiness finance. Contributions come from academic and industry experts across the world and address a wide range of topics including: Agricultural finance, Agricultural policy related to agricultural finance and risk issues, Agricultural lending and credit issues, Farm credit, Businesses and financial risks affecting agriculture and agribusiness, Agricultural policies affecting farm or agribusiness risks and profitability, Risk management strategies including the use of futures and options, Rural credit in developing economies, Microfinance and microcredit applied to agriculture and rural development, Financial efficiency, Agriculture insurance and reinsurance. Agricultural Finance Review is committed to research addressing (1) factors affecting or influencing the financing of agriculture and agribusiness in both developed and developing nations; (2) the broadest aspect of risk assessment and risk management strategies affecting agriculture; and (3) government policies affecting farm profitability, liquidity, and access to credit.
期刊最新文献
Multi-step commodity forecasts using deep learning Regional analysis of agricultural bank liquidity Data-driven determination of plant growth stages for improved weather index insurance design Utilizing FSA conservation loan programs to support farm conservation activities Evaluation of alternative farm safety net program combination strategies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1