{"title":"WAEA 2019 Award Winners","authors":"Waea","doi":"10.22004/AG.ECON.292385","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.292385","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"44 1","pages":"670-671"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68536812","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Groundwater is a valuable input to agricultural production in many areas, but its use imposes external costs on nearby producers. Little attention has been given to externalities that directly affect groundwater productivity. We develop a dynamic, spatially-explicit model of groundwater use that allows changes in saturated thickness to affect both the pumping cost and productivity of nearby wells.We compare gains from coordinated, socially optimal groundwater use to those that result from a user pursuing unilateral optimization. For wells with average saturated thickness, both unilateral and coordinated optimization can moderately increase the net present value of resource rents.
{"title":"Production Externalities and the Gains from Management in a Spatially-Explicit Aquifer","authors":"D. Manning, Jordan F. Suter","doi":"10.22004/AG.ECON.281320","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.281320","url":null,"abstract":"Groundwater is a valuable input to agricultural production in many areas, but its use imposes external costs on nearby producers. Little attention has been given to externalities that directly affect groundwater productivity. We develop a dynamic, spatially-explicit model of groundwater use that allows changes in saturated thickness to affect both the pumping cost and productivity of nearby wells.We compare gains from coordinated, socially optimal groundwater use to those that result from a user pursuing unilateral optimization. For wells with average saturated thickness, both unilateral and coordinated optimization can moderately increase the net present value of resource rents.","PeriodicalId":54890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"44 1","pages":"194-211"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68534655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Brady E. Brewer, J. Bergtold, Allen M. Featherstone, Christine A. Wilson
Understanding the factors that affect a farmer’s credit source is useful for lending institutions to more effectively target customers and provides insight into credit sources that would be affected sooner if a credit crisis would occur and the characteristics that are correlated with a customer using a particular lending institution. Results of this paper suggest that the customers of commercial banks would be the most at risk as they are the most leveraged. Results also show that as conditions deteriorate, farmers add more lending institutions and are also more likely to use a commercial bank or nontraditional lender.
{"title":"Farmers’ Choice of Credit among the Farm Credit System, Commercial Banks, and Nontraditional Lenders","authors":"Brady E. Brewer, J. Bergtold, Allen M. Featherstone, Christine A. Wilson","doi":"10.22004/ag.econ.287984","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.287984","url":null,"abstract":"Understanding the factors that affect a farmer’s credit source is useful for lending institutions to more effectively target customers and provides insight into credit sources that would be affected sooner if a credit crisis would occur and the characteristics that are correlated with a customer using a particular lending institution. Results of this paper suggest that the customers of commercial banks would be the most at risk as they are the most leveraged. Results also show that as conditions deteriorate, farmers add more lending institutions and are also more likely to use a commercial bank or nontraditional lender.","PeriodicalId":54890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"67 1","pages":"362-379"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68535647","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We investigate the impacts of Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) liberalizations of trade and investment barriers on processed food markets. Using a four-region monopolistic competition model with heterogeneous food-processing firms that incorporates domestically operating, exporting, and multinational enterprise (MNE) firms, we quantify the effects of tariff elimination, fixed trade cost reduction, and foreign direct investment (FDI) cost reduction under CETA on prices, domestic sales, bilateral trade flows, affiliate sales, productivity, number of firms, and aggregate output. Our results highlight that trade liberalization promotes bilateral exports but reduces foreign affiliate sales, and, in contrast, lower FDI costs expand MNE affiliate sales but curtail bilateral exports.
{"title":"Trade and Investment Liberalization in the Processed Food Market under the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement","authors":"Jeff Luckstead, S. Devadoss","doi":"10.22004/ag.econ.287972","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.287972","url":null,"abstract":"We investigate the impacts of Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) liberalizations of trade and investment barriers on processed food markets. Using a four-region monopolistic competition model with heterogeneous food-processing firms that incorporates domestically operating, exporting, and multinational enterprise (MNE) firms, we quantify the effects of tariff elimination, fixed trade cost reduction, and foreign direct investment (FDI) cost reduction under CETA on prices, domestic sales, bilateral trade flows, affiliate sales, productivity, number of firms, and aggregate output. Our results highlight that trade liberalization promotes bilateral exports but reduces foreign affiliate sales, and, in contrast, lower FDI costs expand MNE affiliate sales but curtail bilateral exports.","PeriodicalId":54890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"44 1","pages":"267-290"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68535849","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Animal welfare–related production attributes are increasingly considered by U.S. consumers making food purchasing decisions and U.S. voters at the ballot box. This research considers U.S. consumer preferences for egg production attributes. The results reveal preferences for less hen stress, more natural hen behavior, and improved worker health and welfare. We propose an index combining animal welfare scores and consumer preference shares for determining preferred combinations of egg production attributes. When weighting hen housing systems by consumer preference for animal and worker welfare attributes, the preferred system is enriched colony housing, which differs from recent retailer commitments to cage-free aviaries.
{"title":"Is There a “Cage-Free” Lunch in U.S. Egg Production? Public Views of Laying-Hen Housing Attributes","authors":"Daniel S Ochs, C. Wolf, N. Widmar, C. Bir","doi":"10.22004/AG.ECON.287982","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.287982","url":null,"abstract":"Animal welfare–related production attributes are increasingly considered by U.S. consumers making food purchasing decisions and U.S. voters at the ballot box. This research considers U.S. consumer preferences for egg production attributes. The results reveal preferences for less hen stress, more natural hen behavior, and improved worker health and welfare. We propose an index combining animal welfare scores and consumer preference shares for determining preferred combinations of egg production attributes. When weighting hen housing systems by consumer preference for animal and worker welfare attributes, the preferred system is enriched colony housing, which differs from recent retailer commitments to cage-free aviaries.","PeriodicalId":54890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"44 1","pages":"345-361"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68535565","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We estimate the trade-off between agricultural production and forest preservation for the municipalities in Brazil’s agricultural frontier, the so-called “arc of deforestation,” using census and deforestation data for 2006. We use a nonparametric directional output distance function that allows us to identify the gradients of the production possibility frontier, which are the trade-offs of interest. We found that, on average, $979 is forgone in annual livestock, timber, and grain revenues to conserve 1 hectare of forest. This translates, ceteris paribus, to an average present value of costs to permanently sequester CO2 of $16.36/t, higher than most previous estimates.
{"title":"The Cost of Forest Preservation in the Brazilian Amazon: The “Arc of Deforestation”","authors":"F. Silva, L. Fulginiti, R. Perrin","doi":"10.22004/AG.ECON.292328","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.292328","url":null,"abstract":"We estimate the trade-off between agricultural production and forest preservation for the municipalities in Brazil’s agricultural frontier, the so-called “arc of deforestation,” using census and deforestation data for 2006. We use a nonparametric directional output distance function that allows us to identify the gradients of the production possibility frontier, which are the trade-offs of interest. We found that, on average, $979 is forgone in annual livestock, timber, and grain revenues to conserve 1 hectare of forest. This translates, ceteris paribus, to an average present value of costs to permanently sequester CO2 of $16.36/t, higher than most previous estimates.","PeriodicalId":54890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"44 1","pages":"497-512"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68536110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Empirical evidence on the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) for low-income countries generally portrays a rather stark prediction: the program has produced virtually no impact on intended low-income beneficiaries’ exports to high-income countries. This result, based on total merchandise trade, is misleading because it masks three underlying heterogeneities in the program: i) preference structure across countries, ii) pre-existing distortions across sectors, and iii) rules of origin. Using a theoretically consistent gravity equation for sector- and product-level trade over 1962–2010, we illustrate that the GSP has delivered significant positive effects for lowincome countries’ agricultural exports (but not necessarily for their nonagricultural exports) to developed countries.
{"title":"The Bright Side of the Generalized System of (Trade) Preferences: Lessons from Agricultural Trade","authors":"A. Sharma, Kathryn A. Boys, Jason H. Grant","doi":"10.22004/ag.econ.281312","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.281312","url":null,"abstract":"Empirical evidence on the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) for low-income countries generally portrays a rather stark prediction: the program has produced virtually no impact on intended low-income beneficiaries’ exports to high-income countries. This result, based on total merchandise trade, is misleading because it masks three underlying heterogeneities in the program: i) preference structure across countries, ii) pre-existing distortions across sectors, and iii) rules of origin. Using a theoretically consistent gravity equation for sector- and product-level trade over 1962–2010, we illustrate that the GSP has delivered significant positive effects for lowincome countries’ agricultural exports (but not necessarily for their nonagricultural exports) to developed countries.","PeriodicalId":54890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"44 1","pages":"32-61"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68534628","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We develop a framework to incorporate exchange rates into a differential demand system and apply it to U.S. demand for fresh tomatoes by country of origin. We find evidence of incomplete exchange-rate pass-through involving Mexico. Results indicate that accusations of dumping by American agricultural groups in 1995–1996 coincide with the appreciation of the U.S. dollar against the peso in 1994–1995. Traditional modeling approaches that do not account for exchangerate effects would not capture the distinction between dumping and changes in relative prices, leading to the conclusion that too many tomatoes were being imported from Mexico.
{"title":"The Role of Exchange Rates on Country-Differentiated Demand: The Case of United States Tomatoes","authors":"Octavio Valdez-Lafarga, T. Schmitz, J. Englin","doi":"10.22004/AG.ECON.281313","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.281313","url":null,"abstract":"We develop a framework to incorporate exchange rates into a differential demand system and apply it to U.S. demand for fresh tomatoes by country of origin. We find evidence of incomplete exchange-rate pass-through involving Mexico. Results indicate that accusations of dumping by American agricultural groups in 1995–1996 coincide with the appreciation of the U.S. dollar against the peso in 1994–1995. Traditional modeling approaches that do not account for exchangerate effects would not capture the distinction between dumping and changes in relative prices, leading to the conclusion that too many tomatoes were being imported from Mexico.","PeriodicalId":54890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"44 1","pages":"62-79"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68534631","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper investigates the measurement of risk exposure in agriculture and its linkages with input and output decisions. We develop a conceptual analysis of risk under general risk preferences, including cumulative prospect theory. The approach is applied to a sample of U.S. farms from 1996 to 2011. In a multi-input, multi-output framework, the analysis documents the effects of management on production risk exposure and estimates the cost of risk under alternative frameworks. We find that variable inputs contribute to increasing risk, while livestock contributes to reducing risk. Nonfarm income reduces the cost of risk.
{"title":"The Impact of Input and Output Decisions on Agricultural Production Risk","authors":"J. Chavas, J. Cooper, S. Wallander","doi":"10.22004/ag.econ.292329","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.292329","url":null,"abstract":"This paper investigates the measurement of risk exposure in agriculture and its linkages with input and output decisions. We develop a conceptual analysis of risk under general risk preferences, including cumulative prospect theory. The approach is applied to a sample of U.S. farms from 1996 to 2011. In a multi-input, multi-output framework, the analysis documents the effects of management on production risk exposure and estimates the cost of risk under alternative frameworks. We find that variable inputs contribute to increasing risk, while livestock contributes to reducing risk. Nonfarm income reduces the cost of risk.","PeriodicalId":54890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"44 1","pages":"513-535"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68536233","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
China targeted U.S. soybeans, among other commodities, for its recent retaliatory tariff chiefly because of the sheer volume of its imports from the United States. We develop a theoretical and empirical spatial equilibrium trade model to analyze the effects of the 25% Chinese soybean tariff on the United States, China, and nine other major soybean trading regions. Both the United States and China incur welfare losses as a result of the tariff, but Brazil experiences a large net gain. The United States mitigates some of its losses by reallocating trade to other importers, but at a cost to smaller exporters such as Canada.
{"title":"Impacts of Chinese Tariff on World Soybean Markets","authors":"Ethan Sabala, S. Devadoss","doi":"10.22004/AG.ECON.287975","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.287975","url":null,"abstract":"China targeted U.S. soybeans, among other commodities, for its recent retaliatory tariff chiefly because of the sheer volume of its imports from the United States. We develop a theoretical and empirical spatial equilibrium trade model to analyze the effects of the 25% Chinese soybean tariff on the United States, China, and nine other major soybean trading regions. Both the United States and China incur welfare losses as a result of the tariff, but Brazil experiences a large net gain. The United States mitigates some of its losses by reallocating trade to other importers, but at a cost to smaller exporters such as Canada.","PeriodicalId":54890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics","volume":"64 1","pages":"291-310"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68535880","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：