IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jagaec/v44y2012i03p323-334_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Willingness to Pay for Broadband Access by Kentucky Farmers

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffcoat, Chris
  • Davis, Alison F.
  • Hu, Wuyang

Abstract

Since the Internet's inception its impact has been felt across the United States, but the distribution and adoption of the Internet has not necessarily been uniform geographically. As more consumers and businesses rely on the Internet to access information, the data transmission requirements have also increased. Consequently, access to broadband has become increasingly more important since dial-up cannot realistically handle the increased requirements. The use of broadband in agriculture can provide better access to price, weather, and management information while also opening new markets. However, many rural communities lag behind urban areas in broadband access and adoption rates. This study evaluates, through the use of a producer survey, the level of broadband Internet use, motivations for its use, degree of access to broadband, and willingness-to-pay (WTP) to fund broadband infrastructure investments. Results from the producer survey suggested farmers utilize the Internet primarily for accessing weather reports, e-mail, market reports, and agricultural news. Notably, the survey's WTP questions allowed for the use of an interval regression to calculate producer WTP for varying demographics. The results suggested that producers who were younger, farmed larger farms, and those who currently use the Internet but do not have broadband access were WTP more in property taxes to support broadband infrastructure investments than those of a differing demographic. Because WTP levels varied drastically depending on the underlying demographics, it becomes difficult to pinpoint a WTP level for a one-time payment in property taxes that would be acceptable from a policy standpoint.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffcoat, Chris & Davis, Alison F. & Hu, Wuyang, 2012. "Willingness to Pay for Broadband Access by Kentucky Farmers," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 323-334, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:44:y:2012:i:03:p:323-334_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1074070800000444/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph C. Cooper & Michael Hanemann & Giovanni Signorello, 2002. "One-and-One-Half-Bound Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(4), pages 742-750, November.
    2. Amy M.G. Kandilov & Ivan T. Kandilov & Xiangping Liu & Mitch Renkow, 2017. "The Impact of Broadband on U.S. Agriculture: An Evaluation of the USDA Broadband Loan Program," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 39(4), pages 635-661.
    3. Joseph C. Cooper & Michael Hanemann & Giovanni Signorello, 2002. "One-and-One-Half-Bound Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(4), pages 742-750, November.
    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. John Lai & Nicole O. Widmar & Courtney Bir, 2020. "Eliciting Consumer Willingness to Pay for Home Internet Service: Closing the Digital Divide in the State of Indiana," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 263-282, June.
    2. LoPiccalo, Katherine, 2022. "Impact of broadband penetration on U.S. Farm productivity: A panel approach," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9).
    3. Marcin Wójcik & Karolina Dmochowska-Dudek & Paulina Tobiasz-Lis, 2021. "Boosting the Potential for GeoDesign : Digitalisation of the System of Spatial Planning as a Trigger for Smart Rural Development," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-23, June.
    4. Michels, Marius & Musshoff, Oliver, 2021. "Timing of Smartphone Adoption in Agriculture: A Tobit Regression Analysis," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315358, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Fannin, James Matthew, 2012. "Discussion: Economic Opportunities in Rural Communities," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 44(3), pages 1-4, August.
    6. Wang, Tong & Jin, Hailong & Sieverding, Heidi L. & Rao, Xudong & Miao, Yuxin & Kumar, Sandeep & Redfearn, Daren & Nafchi, Ali, 2022. "Understanding farmer perceptions of precision agriculture profitability in the U.S. Midwest," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322502, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Sudtasan, Tatcha & Mitomo, Hitoshi, 2016. "Effects of OTT services on consumer's willingness to pay for optical fiber broadband connection in Thailand," 27th European Regional ITS Conference, Cambridge (UK) 2016 148709, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    8. repec:ags:aaea22:335602 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Gyawali, Buddhi R. & Paudel, Krishna P. & Jean, Rosny & Banerjee, Swagata “Ban”, 2023. "Adoption of computer-based technology (CBT) in agriculture in Kentucky, USA: Opportunities and barriers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    10. Jian Li & Ping Qing & Wuyang Hu & Minglai Li, 2022. "Contract farming, community effect, and farmer valuation of biofortified crop varieties in China: The case of high‐zinc wheat," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 1035-1055, May.
    11. Marius Michels & Wilm Fecke & Jan‐Henning Feil & Oliver Musshoff & Frederike Lülfs‐Baden & Saskia Krone, 2020. "“Anytime, anyplace, anywhere”—A sample selection model of mobile internet adoption in german agriculture," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(2), pages 192-207, April.
    12. Yan, Yiwei & Ames, Glenn C.W. & Colson, Gregory & Chen, Tinggui, 2014. "Willingness to Pay for Safer Dairy Product in China: Evidence from Shanghai Customers' Purchasing Decision of Bright Dairy's Baby Cheese," 2014 Annual Meeting, February 1-4, 2014, Dallas, Texas 162497, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    13. Wang, Tong & Jin, Hailong & Sieverding, Heidi & Kumar, Sandeep & Miao, Yuxin & Rao, Xudong & Obembe, Oladipo & Mirzakhani Nafchi, Ali & Redfearn, Daren & Cheye, Stephen, 2023. "Understanding farmer views of precision agriculture profitability in the U.S. Midwest," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    14. Michels, Marius & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2021. "Understanding the adoption timing of smartphones in German agriculture," 61st Annual Conference, Berlin, Germany, September 22-24, 2021 317046, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).

    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. McFadden, Brandon R. & Lusk, Jayson L., 2013. "Effects of Cost and Campaign Advertising on Support for California’s Proposition 37," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-13, August.
    2. Sadashivappa, Prakash & Qaim, Matin, 2009. "Effects of Bt Cotton in India During the First Five Years of Adoption," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 49947, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Xue, Hong & Mainville, Denise Y. & You, Wen & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr., 2009. "Nutrition Knowledge, Sensory Characteristics and Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Pasture-Fed Beef," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49277, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Kim, GwanSeon & Petrolia, Daniel R. & Interis, Matthew G., 2012. "A Method for Improving Welfare Estimates from Multiple-Referendum Surveys," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(2), pages 1-12, August.
    5. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    6. Corsi, Alessandro, 2012. "Willingness-to-pay in terms of price: an application to organic beef during and after the “mad cow” crisis," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 92(01), pages 25-46, October.
    7. Hu, Wuyang, 2006. "Use of Spike Models in Measuring Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Non-GM Oil," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Driouchi, Ahmed & Kadiri, Molk, 2010. "Emigration of Skilled Labor under Risk Aversion: The Case of Medical Doctors from Middle Eastern and North African Economies," MPRA Paper 22810, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 20 May 2010.
    9. Henry, Miguel & Mittelhammer, Ron & Loomis, John, 2018. "An Information-Theoretic Approach to Estimating Willingness To Pay for River Recreation Site Attributes," MPRA Paper 89842, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Halkos, George, 2012. "The use of contingent valuation in assessing marine and coastal ecosystems’ water quality: A review," MPRA Paper 42183, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Jose-Luis Pinto-Prades & Veronica Farreras & Jaime de Bobadilla, 2008. "Willingness to pay for a reduction in mortality risk after a myocardial infarction: an application of the contingent valuation method to the case of eplerenone," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(1), pages 69-78, February.
    12. Sutton, William R. & Larson, Douglas M. & Jarvis, Lovell S., 2004. "A New Approach For Assessing The Costs Of Living With Wildlife In Developing Countries," Working Papers 11951, University of California, Davis, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    13. Petrolia, Daniel & Interis, Matthew & Hwang, Joonghyun, 2015. "Single-Choice, Repeated-Choice, and Best-Worst Elicitation Formats: Do Results Differ and by How Much?," Working Papers 212479, Mississippi State University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    14. Bateman, Ian J. & Day, Brett H. & Dupont, Diane P. & Georgiou, Stavros, 2006. "Incentive compatibility and procedural invariance testing of the one-and-one-half-bound dichotomous choice elicitation method: distinguishing strategic behaviour from the anchoring heuristic," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21104, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yen, Steven T. & Bowker, J.M. & Newman, David H., 2008. "Modeling Willingness to Pay for Land Conservation Easements: Treatment of Zero and Protest Bids and Application and Policy Implications," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 267-285, April.
    16. David Hoyos & Petr Mariel, 2010. "Contingent Valuation: Past, Present and Future," Prague Economic Papers, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2010(4), pages 329-343.
    17. Henry-Osorio, Miguel & Mittelhammer, Ronald C., 2012. "An Information-Theoretic Approach to Modeling Binary Choices: Estimating Willingness to Pay for Recreation Site Attributes," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 123432, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Cicia, Gianni & D'Ercole, Elisabetta & Marino, Davide, 2003. "Costs and benefits of preserving farm animal genetic resources from extinction: CVM and Bio-economic model for valuing a conservation program for the Italian Pentro horse," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 445-459, July.
    19. Neil Powe & Kenneth Willis & Guy Garrod, 2006. "Difficulties in valuing street light improvement: trust, surprise and bound effects," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(4), pages 371-381.
    20. Ruggiero Sardaro & Vincenzo Fucilli & Claudio Acciani, 2015. "Measuring the Value of Rural Landscape in Support of Preservation Policies," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2015(2), pages 125-138.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • Q31 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • Q38 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy (includes OPEC Policy)

    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:cup:jagaec:v:44:y:2012:i:03:p:323-334_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aae .

    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.