IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/joaaec/189084.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pasture-Based versus Conventional Milk Production: Where Is the Profit?

Author

Listed:
  • Gillespie, Jeffrey
  • Nehring, Richard

Abstract

Costs and returns of pasture-based dairy production are compared with those of conventional production using matching samples. Both whole-farm and dairy enterprise-level estimates are made using the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Resource Management Survey data. Conventional farms are matched to pasture-based farms on the basis of operation scale, scope, region, and farmer demographics and adoption of technology. Results show for pasture-based production lower net farm income on per-cow, per-hundredweight milk produced, and total bases. On an enterprise basis, results show for pasture-based production, higher net return over operating cost and lower net return over total cost per hundredweight milk produced.

Suggested Citation

  • Gillespie, Jeffrey & Nehring, Richard, 2014. "Pasture-Based versus Conventional Milk Production: Where Is the Profit?," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 46(4), pages 1-15, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:joaaec:189084
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.189084
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/189084/files/jaae705.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.189084?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. G. A. Peterson, 1955. "Selection of Maximum Profit Combinations of Livestock Enterprises and Crop Rotations," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 37(3), pages 546-554.
    2. Loren W. Tauer, 2009. "Estimation of Treatment Effects of Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin Using Matching Samples," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(3), pages 411-423.
    3. Tauer, Loren W. & Mishra, Ashok K., 2006. "Can the small dairy farm remain competitive in US agriculture?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 458-468, October.
    4. Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Nehring, Richard F. & Hallahan, Charles B. & Sandretto, Carmen L., 2009. "Pasture-Based Dairy Systems: Who Are the Producers and Are Their Operations More Profitable than Conventional Dairies?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(3), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Carlos D. Mayen & Joseph V. Balagtas & Corinne E. Alexander, 2010. "Technology Adoption and Technical Efficiency: Organic and Conventional Dairy Farms in the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(1), pages 181-195.
    6. Gillespie, Jeffrey & Nehring, Richard, 2013. "Comparing economic performance of organic and conventional U.S. beef farms using matching samples," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 57(2), pages 1-15.
    7. Alberto Abadie & David Drukker & Jane Leber Herr & Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Implementing matching estimators for average treatment effects in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 4(3), pages 290-311, September.
    8. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    9. Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 4-29, February.
    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:ags:aaea22:335490 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Jonathan Walsh & Robert Parsons & Qingbin Wang & David Conner, 2020. "What Makes an Organic Dairy Farm Profitable in the United States? Evidence from 10 Years of Farm Level Data in Vermont," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, January.
    3. Qushim, Berdikul & Gillespie, Jeffrey, 2016. "Women Farm Operators in the U.S. Meat Goat Production: Who is More Productive?," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 230004, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    4. Allison, John & Burdine, Kenneth H. & Dillon, Carl & Smith, S. Ray & Butler, David M. & Bates, Gary E. & Pighetti, Gina M., 2021. "Optimal forage and supplement balance for organic dairy farms in the Southeastern United States," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    5. Nehring, Richard & Gillespie, Jeffrey M., 2020. "The Economics and Productivity of U.S. Cow-Calf Production," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304363, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Nehring, Richard & Gillespie, Jeffrey & Erickson, Kenneth & Harris, J. Michael & Heutte, Silke & Sauer, Johannes, 2018. "Small U.S. Dairy Farms: Can They Compete? A Revisit," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266535, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    7. Nehring, Richard & Sauer, Johannes & Gillespie, Jeffrey & Hallahan, Charlie, 2016. "United States and European Union Dairy Farms: Where Is the Competitive Edge?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 19(B), pages 1-22, August.

    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. Qushim, Berdikul & Gillespie, Jeffrey, 2016. "Women Farm Operators in the U.S. Meat Goat Production: Who is More Productive?," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 230004, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    2. Uematsu, Hiroki & Mishra, Ashok K., 2012. "Organic farmers or conventional farmers: Where's the money?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 55-62.
    3. Blunch, Niels-Hugo & Datta Gupta, Nabanita, 2020. "Mothers’ health knowledge gap for children with diarrhea: A decomposition analysis across caste and religion in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    4. Jeon, Jin Q. & Lee, Cheolwoo & Nasser, Tareque & Via, M. Tony, 2015. "Multiple lead underwriter IPOs and firm visibility," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 128-149.
    5. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2017. "The State of Applied Econometrics: Causality and Policy Evaluation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 3-32, Spring.
    6. Rumokoy, Lawren J. & Neupane, Suman & Chung, Richard Y. & Vithanage, Kulunu, 2019. "Underwriter network structure and political connections in the Chinese IPO market," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 199-214.
    7. Gillespie, Jeffrey & Nehring, Richard, 2013. "Comparing economic performance of organic and conventional U.S. beef farms using matching samples," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 57(2), pages 1-15.
    8. Dominik M. Piehlmaier, 2022. "Overconfidence and the adoption of robo-advice: why overconfident investors drive the expansion of automated financial advice," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, December.
    9. Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Nehring, Richard F., 2012. "The Economics of Organic Versus Conventional Cow-calf Production," 2012 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2012, Birmingham, Alabama 119773, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    10. Mishra, Ashok K. & Kumar, Anjani & Joshi, Pramod K. & D'souza, Alwin, 2016. "Impact of contracts in high yielding varieties seed production on profits and yield: The case of Nepal," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 110-121.
    11. Zhu, Wei & Qi, Lixia & Wang, Ruime, 2021. "Impact of Market Price Support Measures on Chemical Fertilizer Use in China," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 9(01), January.
    12. Marcus Linder & Joakim Björkdahl & Daniel Ljungberg, 2014. "Environmental Orientation and Economic Performance: a Quasi‐experimental Study of Small Swedish Firms," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(5), pages 333-348, July.
    13. María José Ibáñez & Felipe Vásquez Lavin & Roberto D. Ponce Oliva, 2023. "Female Underperformance Hypothesis Revisited: Methodological Review and Empirical Testing," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.
    14. Kuhn, Dieter, 2011. "Delayering and Firm Performance: Evidence from Swiss firm-level Data," Working papers 2011/02, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    15. Bruno Cirillo & Stefano Brusoni & Giovanni Valentini, 2014. "The Rejuvenation of Inventors Through Corporate Spinouts," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1764-1784, December.
    16. G. Miller & Yuriy Pylypchuk, 2014. "Marital Status, Spousal Characteristics, and the Use of Preventive Care," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 323-338, September.
    17. Liao, Minli & White, Kevin R., 2014. "Post-permanency service needs, service utilization, and placement discontinuity for kinship versus non-kinship families," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 370-378.
    18. Mullally, Conner, 2011. "Development in the Midst of Drought: Evaluating an Agricultural Extension and Credit Program in Nicaragua," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 109664, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Erlend E. Bø & Elin Halvorsen & Thor O. Thoresen, 2019. "Heterogeneity of the Carnegie Effect," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 54(3), pages 726-759.
    20. Peter Z. Schochet, "undated". "Statistical Theory for the RCT-YES Software: Design-Based Causal Inference for RCTs," Mathematica Policy Research Reports a0c005c003c242308a92c02dc, Mathematica Policy Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness;

    JEL classification:

    • Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets

    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:joaaec:189084. 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/saeaaea.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.