IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/jlaare/31153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Farmers' Attitudes Toward Risk Using The "Closing-In" Method

Author

Listed:
  • Bard, Sharon K.
  • Barry, Peter J.

Abstract

The 1996 Farm Bill and low commodity prices have regenerated interest in the impact of risk and farmers' risk attitudes on production agriculture. Previous research has used expected utility theory (EUT) and direct elicitation of utility functions (DEU) for eliciting risk attitudes. To overcome the criticism of EUT and DEU, a recently developed technique called the "closing in" method is adapted for eliciting farmers' risk attitudes. This method is applied to Illinois farmers by using a computerized decision procedure, and is validated by comparing the results to the farmers' self-assessment of their risk attitudes and score to a risk attitudinal scale.

Suggested Citation

  • Bard, Sharon K. & Barry, Peter J., 2001. "Assessing Farmers' Attitudes Toward Risk Using The "Closing-In" Method," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 1-13, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:jlaare:31153
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.31153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/31153/files/26010248.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.31153?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schurle, Bryan W. & Tierney, William I., Jr., 1990. "A Comparison of Risk Preference Measurements with Implications for Extension Programming," Staff Papers 118185, Kansas State University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    2. Patrick, George R. & Wilson, Paul N. & Barry, Peter J. & Boggess, William G. & Young, Douglas L., 1985. "Risk Perceptions and Management Responses: Producer-Generated Hypotheses For Risk Modeling," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 231-238, December.
    3. Robison, Lindon J. & Shupp, Robert S. & Myers, Robert J., 2010. "Expected utility paradoxes," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 187-193, April.
    4. Anderson, Jock R. & Dillon, John L. & Hardaker, Brian, 1977. "Agricultural Decision Analysis," Monographs: Applied Economics, AgEcon Search, number 288652, November.
    5. Holt, Matthew T. & Moschini, GianCarlo, 1992. "Alternative Measures Of Risk In Commodity Supply Models: An Analysis Of Sow Farrowing Decisions In The United States," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(1), pages 1-12, July.
    6. Halter, A.N. & Mason, Robert, 1978. "Utility Measurement For Those Who Need To Know," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 3(2), pages 1-12, December.
    7. Ziv Bar-Shira, 1992. "Nonparametric Test of the Expected Utility Hypothesis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(3), pages 523-533.
    8. Schoemaker, Paul J H, 1982. "The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence and Limitations," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 529-563, June.
    9. George F. Patrick & Stanton Ullerich, 1996. "Information sources and risk attitudes of large-scale farmers, farm managers, and agricultural bankers," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(5), pages 461-471.
    10. Machina, Mark J, 1982. ""Expected Utility" Analysis without the Independence Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 277-323, March.
    11. Patrick, George F. & Wilson, Paul N. & Barry, Peter J. & Boggess, William G. & Young, Douglas L., 1985. "Risk Perceptions And Management Responses: Producer-Generated Hypotheses For Risk Modeling," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(2), pages 1-8, December.
    12. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Anderson, Jock R. & Feder, Gershon, 2007. "Agricultural Extension," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: Robert Evenson & Prabhu Pingali (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 44, pages 2343-2378, Elsevier.
    14. Conlisk, John, 1989. "Three Variants on the Allais Example," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 392-407, June.
    15. Lindon J. Robison, 1982. "An Appraisal of Expected Utility Hypothesis Tests Constructed from Responses to Hypothetical Questions and Experimental Choices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 64(2), pages 367-375.
    16. David T. Eckman & George F. Patrick & Wesley N. Musser, 1996. "Factors Affecting Written Marketing Plan Adoption by Large-Scale Grain Producers," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 18(4), pages 565-574.
    17. Alan Collins & Wesley N. Musser & Robert Mason, 1991. "Prospect Theory and Risk Preferences of Oregon Seed Producers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(2), pages 429-435.
    18. Camerer, Colin F, 1989. "An Experimental Test of Several Generalized Utility Theories," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 61-104, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:mth:jas888:v:6:y:2018:i:1:p:116-130 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Lagerkvist, Carl Johan, 2005. "Assessing farmers' risk attitudes based on economic, social, personal, and environmental sources of risk: evidence from Sweden," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19361, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Zeweld, Woldegebrial & Huylenbroeck, Guido Van & Tesfay, Girmay & Speelman, Stijn, 2019. "Impacts of socio-psychological factors on smallholder farmers’ risk attitudes: empirical evidence and implications," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 58(2), March.
    4. Fausti, Scott W. & Gillespie, Jeffrey M., 2006. "Measuring risk attitude of agricultural producers using a mail survey: how consistent are the methods?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(2), pages 1-18, June.
    5. Ahearn, Mary Clare & Collender, Robert N. & Diao, Xinshen & Harrington, David H. & Hoppe, Robert A. & Korb, Penelope J. & Makki, Shiva S. & Morehart, Mitchell J. & Roberts, Michael J. & Roe, Terry L. , 2004. "Decoupled Payments In A Changing Policy Setting," Agricultural Economic Reports 33981, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    6. Kassu Wamisho Hossiso & Aaron Laporte & David Ripplinger, 2017. "The Effects of Contract Mechanism Design and Risk Preferences on Biomass Supply for Ethanol Production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(3), pages 339-357, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bard, Sharon K. & Barry, Peter J., 2000. "Developing A Scale For Assessing Risk Attitudes Of Agricultural Decision Makers," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 3(1), pages 1-17.
    2. Sulewski, Piotr & Kłoczko-Gajewska, Anna, 2014. "Farmers’ risk perception, risk aversion and strategies to cope with production risk: an empirical study from Poland," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 116(3), pages 1-8, December.
    3. Gomez-Limon, Jose Antonio & Riesgo, Laura & Arriaza Balmón, Manuel, 2002. "Agricultural Risk Aversion Revisited: A Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24827, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Love, Ross O. & Robison, Lindon J., 1984. "An Empirical Analysis Of The Intertemporal Stability Of Risk Preference," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 16(1), pages 1-7, July.
    5. Wesley N. Musser & George F. Patrick & David T. Eckman, 1996. "Risk and Grain Marketing Behavior of Large-Scale Farmers," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 18(1), pages 65-77.
    6. Simone Cerreia‐Vioglio & David Dillenberger & Pietro Ortoleva, 2015. "Cautious Expected Utility and the Certainty Effect," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 693-728, March.
    7. Ramaratnam, S. Sri & Rister, M. Edward & Bessler, David A. & Novak, James L., 1986. "Risk Attitudes And Farm/Producer Attributes: A Case Study Of Texas Coastal Bend Grain Sorghum Producers," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 18(2), pages 1-11, December.
    8. Finkelshtain, Israel & Feinerman, Eli, 1997. "Framing the Allais paradox as a daily farm decision problem: tests and explanations," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 155-167, January.
    9. Ziv Bar-Shira, 1992. "Nonparametric Test of the Expected Utility Hypothesis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(3), pages 523-533.
    10. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2007. "Stochastic expected utility theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 259-286, June.
    11. Cochran, Mark J., 1986. "Stochastic Dominance: The State Of The Art In Agricultural Economics," Regional Research Projects > 1986: S-180 Annual Meeting, March 23-26, 1986, Tampa, Florida 271995, Regional Research Projects > S-180: An Economic Analysis of Risk Management Strategies for Agricultural Production Firms.
    12. Battalio, Raymond C & Kagel, John H & Jiranyakul, Komain, 1990. "Testing between Alternative Models of Choice under Uncertainty: Some Initial Results," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 25-50, March.
    13. Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
    14. Pennings, Joost M.E. & Garcia, Philip, 2004. "Strategic Risk Management Behavior: What Can Utility Functions Tell Us?," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20388, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. repec:cup:judgdm:v:2:y:2007:i::p:115-125 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Kontek, Krzysztof, 2015. "Fanning-Out or Fanning-In? Continuous or Discontinuous? Estimating Indifference Curves Inside the Marschak-Machina Triangle using Certainty Equivalents," MPRA Paper 63965, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Vieth, Gary R. & Suppapanya, Pramote, 1996. "An Evaluation Of Selected Decision Models: A Case Of Crop Choice In Northern Thailand," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(2), pages 1-11, December.
    18. Bethany Weber, 2007. "The effects of losses and event splitting on the Allais paradox," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 2, pages 115-125, April.
    19. Krzysztof Kontek, 2018. "Boundary effects in the Marschak-Machina triangle," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(6), pages 587-606, November.
    20. Musser, Wesley N., 1994. "Progress In Risk Analysis In Regional Projects," 1994 Quantifying Long Run Agricultural Risks and Evaluating Farmer Responses Risk, Technical Committee Meeting, March 24-26, 1994, Gulf Shores State Park, Alabama 271553, Regional Research Projects > S-232: Quantifying Long Run Agricultural Risks and Evaluating Farmer Responses to Risk.
    21. Heidelbach, Olaf, 2007. "Efficiency of selected risk management instruments: An empirical analysis of risk reduction in Kazakhstani crop production," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 40, number 92323, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Risk and Uncertainty;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:jlaare:31153. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/waeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.