IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v100y2018i4p1120-1135..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Producer Decision Making under Uncertainty: Role of Past Experiences and Question Framing

Author

Listed:
  • Glynn T Tonsor

Abstract

Limited research examines the role of reference points or how uncertain outcomes are processed in producer decisions. This study employs a survey containing a split-sample choice experiment varying how uncertain outcomes are portrayed, and assesses multiple candidate reference points. Results suggest that U.S. cattle producers use the best outcome experienced as reference points in their decisions, and the method by which uncertain outcomes are presented impacts loss aversion, marginal willingness to pay, and market participation estimates. This illustrates how research employing split samples, multiple reference points, and alternative methods of portraying uncertain outcomes may better identify producer decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Glynn T Tonsor, 2018. "Producer Decision Making under Uncertainty: Role of Past Experiences and Question Framing," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1120-1135.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:100:y:2018:i:4:p:1120-1135.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aay034
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Joshua Huang & Teresa Serra & Philip Garcia, 2021. "The Value of USDA Announcements in the Electronically Traded Corn Futures Market: A Modified Sufficient Test with Risk Adjustments," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 712-734, September.
    2. Vincenzina Caputo & Jayson L Lusk & Rodolfo M Nayga, 2020. "Am I Getting a Good Deal? Reference‐DependentDecision Making When the Reference Price Is Uncertain," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(1), pages 132-153, January.
    3. Valerie Kilders & Vincenzina Caputo, 2024. "A reference‐price‐informed experiment to assess consumer demand for beef with a reduced carbon footprint," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(1), pages 3-20, January.
    4. Zhanwen Shi & Erbao Cao, 2020. "Contract farming problems and games under yield uncertainty," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(4), pages 1210-1238, October.
    5. Robert Huber & Hang Xiong & Kevin Keller & Robert Finger, 2022. "Bridging behavioural factors and standard bio‐economic modelling in an agent‐based modelling framework," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 35-63, February.
    6. Zhao, Shuoli & Skevas, Teo & Chai, Yuan & Tack, Jesse B., 2020. "Crop Insurance Decision under Expected Revenue," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304574, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Mulwa, Chalmers & Visser, Martine & Gitonga, Zachary, 2019. "Weather Uncertainty and Demand for Information in Agricultural Technology Adoption: The Case of Namibia," EfD Discussion Paper 19-25, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    8. McKendree, Melissa G.S. & Tonsor, Glynn T. & Schulz, Lee L., 2021. "Management of Multiple Sources of Risk in Livestock Production," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(1), pages 75-93, February.
    9. Kar Ho Lim & Wuyang Hu, 2023. "Contextual reference price in choice experiments," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(4), pages 1288-1306, August.
    10. Marc F. Bellemare & Yu Na Lee & David R. Just, 2020. "Producer Attitudes Toward Output Price Risk: Experimental Evidence from the Lab and from the Field," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(3), pages 806-825, May.
    11. Shuoli Zhao & Chengyan Yue, 2020. "Risk preferences of commodity crop producers and specialty crop producers: An application of prospect theory," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(3), pages 359-372, May.
    12. Zhanwen Shi & Erbao Cao, 2021. "Risk pooling cooperative games in contract farming," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 69(1), pages 117-139, March.

    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:oup:ajagec:v:100:y:2018:i:4:p:1120-1135.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.