IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/canjag/v57y2009i2p223-239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk and Nitrogen Application Levels

Author

Listed:
  • Predrag Rajsic
  • Alfons Weersink
  • Markus Gandorfer

Abstract

Stochastic weather and soil conditions are the suggested reasons why farmers tend to apply more than the recommended levels of nitrogen. This study found that uncertainty plays a role in the application decision of farmers but not in the manner typically assumed. Using a time series of field trials of corn yield to nitrogen for the same site, nitrogen was found to be a risk‐increasing input suggesting that uncertainty should decrease, rather than increase, a risk‐averse farmer's rate of nitrogen application. Similarly, viewing risk as a profit shortfall, in which fertilizer acts in the role of insurance, was also not supported with the empirical results. Instead, the key role of uncertainty is its impact on expected profits. Increasing application rates leads to lower returns in most years but the increase in profits generated under favorable growing conditions results in greater expected profits with a high application strategy. Les conditions météorologiques et pédologiques aléatoires seraient les raisons pour lesquelles les agriculteurs tendent à appliquer des doses d'azote supérieures aux doses recommandées. Selon la présente étude, l'incertitude joue un rôle dans les décisions d'application des agriculteurs, mais d'une façon différente de celle généralement supposée. À l'aide d'une série chronologique d'essais en champ mesurant le rendement du maïs en fonction de l'azote dans le même site, nous avons trouvé que l'azote était un intrant qui augmentait les risques, ce qui laisse supposer que l'incertitude devrait faire diminuer, plutôt que de faire augmenter, la dose d'application d'azote dans le cas d'un producteur qui craint les risques. De même, considérer le risque de baisse des profits où l'engrais assume le rôle d'assurance n'a pas été appuyé par les résultats empiriques. Le rôle clé de l'incertitude est son impact sur les profits prévus. L'augmentation des doses d'application entraîne une diminution des rendements la plupart des années, mais l'augmentation des profits générés dans des conditions de croissance favorables entraîne des profits prévus plus élevés grâce à une meilleure stratégie d'application.

Suggested Citation

  • Predrag Rajsic & Alfons Weersink & Markus Gandorfer, 2009. "Risk and Nitrogen Application Levels," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 57(2), pages 223-239, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:57:y:2009:i:2:p:223-239
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7976.2009.01149.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7976.2009.01149.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1744-7976.2009.01149.x?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. Glenn Sheriff, 2005. "Efficient Waste? Why Farmers Over-Apply Nutrients and the Implications for Policy Design," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 27(4), pages 542-557.
    2. Berg, Ernst & Starp, Michael, 2006. "Farm Level Risk Assessment Using Downside Risk Measures," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25400, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Babcock, Bruce A. & Shogren, Jason F., 1995. "The cost of agricultural production risk," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 141-150, August.
    4. Jutta Roosen & David A. Hennessy, 2003. "Tests for the Role of Risk Aversion on Input Use," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 30-43.
    5. David J. Pannell, 2006. "Flat Earth Economics: The Far-reaching Consequences of Flat Payoff Functions in Economic Decision Making," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 28(4), pages 553-566.
    6. Carl H. Nelson & Paul V. Preckel, 1989. "The Conditional Beta Distribution as a Stochastic Production Function," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 71(2), pages 370-378.
    7. H. Alan Love & Steven T. Buccola, 1991. "Joint Risk Preference-Technology Estimation with a Primal System," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(3), pages 765-774.
    8. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1971. "Increasing risk II: Its economic consequences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 66-84, March.
    9. Sarin, Rakesh K. & Weber, Martin, 1993. "Risk-value models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 135-149, October.
    10. Rajsic, Predrag & Weersink, Alfons, 2008. "Do farmers waste fertilizer? A comparison of ex post optimal nitrogen rates and ex ante recommendations by model, site and year," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 97(1-2), pages 56-67, April.
    11. Richard E. Just & Rulon D. Pope, 1979. "Production Function Estimation and Related Risk Considerations," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 61(2), pages 276-284.
    12. Pannell, David J. & Malcolm, Bill & Kingwell, Ross S., 2000. "Are we risking too much? Perspectives on risk in farm modelling," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 69-78, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Chai, Yuan & J. Pannell, David & G. Pardey, Philip, 2023. "Nudging farmers to reduce water pollution from nitrogen fertilizer," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    2. Chai, Yuan & Pannell, David J. & Pardey, Philip G., 2022. "Reducing Water Pollution from Nitrogen Fertilizer: Revisiting Insights from Production Economics," Staff Papers 320519, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    3. Mitchell, Paul David, 1999. "The theory and practice of green insurance: insurance to encourage the adoption of corn rootworm IPM," ISU General Staff Papers 1999010108000013154, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Gandorfer, Markus & Pannell, David & Meyer-Aurich, Andreas, 2011. "Analyzing the effects of risk and uncertainty on optimal tillage and nitrogen fertilizer intensity for field crops in Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(8), pages 615-622, October.
    5. Agarwal, Sandip Kumar, 2017. "Subjective beliefs and decision making under uncertainty in the field," ISU General Staff Papers 201701010800006248, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    6. Monjardino, Marta & McBeath, T. & Brennan, Lisa E. & Llewellyn, Rick S., 2012. "Revisiting N fertilisation rates in low-rainfall grain cropping regions of Australia: A risk analysis," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 124339, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Bontemps, Christophe & Bougherara, Douadia & Nauges, Céline, 2020. "Do Risk Preferences Really Matter? The Case of Pesticide Use in Agriculture," TSE Working Papers 20-1095, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    8. Monjardino, M. & McBeath, T. & Ouzman, J. & Llewellyn, R. & Jones, B., 2015. "Farmer risk-aversion limits closure of yield and profit gaps: A study of nitrogen management in the southern Australian wheatbelt," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 108-118.
    9. Monjardino, Marta & McBeath, T. & Brennan, Lisa E. & Llewellyn, Rick S., 2012. "Are farmers in low-rainfall cropping regions under-fertilizing? An Australian case-study," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 124976, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Meyer-Aurich, Andreas & Karatay, Yusuf Nadi, 2019. "Effects of uncertainty and farmers' risk aversion on optimal N fertilizer supply in wheat production in Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 130-139.
    11. Murat Isik & Madhu Khanna, 2003. "Stochastic Technology, Risk Preferences, and Adoption of Site-Specific Technologies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(2), pages 305-317.
    12. Lichtenberg, Erik, 2002. "Agriculture and the environment," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 23, pages 1249-1313, Elsevier.
    13. Nordblom, Thomas L. & Hutchings, Timothy R. & Godfrey, Sosheel S. & Schefe, Cassandra R., 2021. "Precision variable rate nitrogen for dryland farming on waterlogging Riverine Plains of Southeast Australia?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    14. Bougherara, Douadia & Nauges, Céline, 2018. "How laboratory experiments could help disentangle the influences of production risk and risk preferences on input decisions," TSE Working Papers 18-903, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    15. Asci, Serhat & Borisova, Tatiana & VanSickle, John J., 2015. "Role of economics in developing fertilizer best management practices," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 251-261.
    16. Nauges, Céline & Bougherara, Douadia & Koussoubé, Estelle, 2021. "Fertilizer use and risk: New evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa," TSE Working Papers 21-1266, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    17. Jutta Roosen & David A. Hennessy, 2003. "Tests for the Role of Risk Aversion on Input Use," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 30-43.
    18. Berg, Ernst & Schmitz, Bernhard, 2007. "Weather-based instruments in the context of whole farm risk management," 101st Seminar, July 5-6, 2007, Berlin Germany 9269, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Yiridoe, Emmanuel K. & Amon-Armah, Frederick & Hebb, Dale & Jamieson, Rob, 2013. "Eco-efficiency of Alternative Cropping Systems Managed in an Agricultural Watershed," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150357, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Finger, Robert & Hediger, Werner, 2007. "The Application of Robust Regression to a Production Function Comparison – the Example of Swiss Corn," MPRA Paper 4740, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    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:bla:canjag:v:57:y:2009:i:2:p:223-239. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caefmea.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.