IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea03/22119.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Economic Assessment Of The Whole-Farm Impact Of Precision Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Olson, Kent D.
  • Elisabeth, Pascal

Abstract

The full impact of an investment in a management information system (MIS), such as precision agriculture (PA), comes from improved managerial decision making throughout the whole farm and not just from improvements in a specific part of the farm. This study was conducted to determine whether the adoption of PA had a positive impact on whole-farm profitability. To overcome problems of simultaneity and self-selection in the adoption decision of PA, this study used a two stage econometric model using data from farms in Southwest Minnesota. The PA adoption decision was evaluated in the first stage, and the impact of adopting PA was evaluated in the second stage. The whole farm rate of return to assets (ROA) was used to measure the impact of PA. For all 212 farms in the dataset, the adoption of precision agriculture was explained significantly (p<0.1) by two variables: positively by the farmer's self-described soil variability and negatively by the level of non-farm income. For the 63 crop farms in the dataset, adoption of PA was explained significantly (p<0.1) only by the farmer's self-described soil variability. The adoption of PA was estimated to have a significant (p<0.1) negative impact on ROA for the entire group of farms but was not significant when the farms were separated into crop farms only and into size clusters. PA's lack of significance in explaining ROA in the subgroups may be due to small sample size, the variability of ROA itself, the lack of fully implementing PA as an MIS, differences in management ability, and the availability of other farming methods that are just as profitable as PA.

Suggested Citation

  • Olson, Kent D. & Elisabeth, Pascal, 2003. "An Economic Assessment Of The Whole-Farm Impact Of Precision Agriculture," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22119, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea03:22119
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.22119
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/22119/files/sp03ol01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.22119?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. Heckman, James J, 1974. "Shadow Prices, Market Wages, and Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 42(4), pages 679-694, July.
    2. Tomaszewski, M. A. & van Asseldonk, M. A. P. M. & Dijkhuizen, A. A. & Huirne, R. B. M., 2000. "Determining farm effects attributable to the introduction and use of a dairy management information system in The Netherlands," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 79-86, June.
    3. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    4. Tvedt, Douglas D. & Olson, Kent D. & Hawkins, Douglas M., 1989. "Short-Run Indicators Of Financial Success For Southwest Minnesota Farmers," Staff Papers 13933, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    5. James J. Heckman, 1976. "The Common Structure of Statistical Models of Truncation, Sample Selection and Limited Dependent Variables and a Simple Estimator for Such Models," NBER Chapters, in: Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 5, number 4, pages 475-492, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Francis Vella, 1998. "Estimating Models with Sample Selection Bias: A Survey," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(1), pages 127-169.
    7. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & McBride, William D., 2000. "Genetically Engineered Crops For Pest Management In U.S. Agriculture," Agricultural Economic Reports 33931, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    8. El-Osta, Hisham S. & Mishra, Ashok K., 2001. "Adoption And Economic Impact Of Site-Specific Technologies In U.S. Agriculture," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20593, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    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. Griffin, Terry W. & Yeager, Elizabeth A. & Ibendahl, Gregg, 2019. "Pr - Adoption Of Precision Agriculture Technology," 22nd Congress, Tasmania, Australia, March 3-8, 2019 345898, International Farm Management Association.
    2. Miller, Noah J. & Bergtold, Jason S. & Griffin, Terry W. & Shanoyan, Aleksan, 2017. "A Spatio-Temporal Analysis of the Adoption Process of Complementary Precision Agricultural Practices in Kansas," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258199, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Miller, Noah J. & Griffin, Terry & Bergtold, Jason & Sharda, Ajay & Ciampitti, Ignacio, 2017. "Adoption of Precision Agriculture Technology Bundles on Kansas Farms," 2017 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2017, Mobile, Alabama 252832, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

    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. Lewbel, Arthur, 2007. "Endogenous selection or treatment model estimation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 141(2), pages 777-806, December.
    2. Martin Huber, 2014. "Treatment Evaluation in the Presence of Sample Selection," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(8), pages 869-905, November.
    3. Evgeniy M. Ozhegov, 2014. "The Underwriting, Choice And Performance Of Government-Insured Mortgages In Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 31/FE/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    4. Bhat, Chandra R. & Eluru, Naveen, 2009. "A copula-based approach to accommodate residential self-selection effects in travel behavior modeling," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 749-765, August.
    5. Fortin, Nicole & Lemieux, Thomas & Firpo, Sergio, 2011. "Decomposition Methods in Economics," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 1, pages 1-102, Elsevier.
    6. Seonho Shin, 2022. "To work or not? Wages or subsidies?: Copula-based evidence of subsidized refugees’ negative selection into employment," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 63(4), pages 2209-2252, October.
    7. Denis Y. Orlov & Evgeniy M. Ozhegov, 2016. "Do sequel movies really earn more than non-sequels? Evidence from the US box office," ACEI Working Paper Series AWP-03-2016, Association for Cultural Economics International, revised Apr 2016.
    8. Denis Y. Orlov & Evgeniy M. Ozhegov, 2015. "Estimating the Efficiency of Sequels in the Film Industry," HSE Working papers WP BRP 96/EC/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    9. Paul Ellickson & Sanjog Misra, 2012. "Enriching interactions: Incorporating outcome data into static discrete games," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, March.
    10. Jochmans, Koen, 2015. "Multiplicative-error models with sample selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 184(2), pages 315-327.
    11. Victor Chernozhukov & Iv'an Fern'andez-Val & Siyi Luo, 2018. "Distribution Regression with Sample Selection, with an Application to Wage Decompositions in the UK," Papers 1811.11603, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    12. Martin Huber & Giovanni Mellace, 2015. "Sharp Bounds on Causal Effects under Sample Selection," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 77(1), pages 129-151, February.
    13. Alwang, Jeffrey Roger & Stallmann, Judith I., 1992. "Supply And Demand For Married Female Labor: Rural And Urban Differences In The Southern United States," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(2), pages 1-14, December.
    14. Carson, Richard T. & Louviere, Jordan J., 2014. "Statistical properties of consideration sets," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 37-48.
    15. Arndt Reichert & Harald Tauchmann, 2014. "When outcome heterogeneously matters for selection: a generalized selection correction estimator," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(7), pages 762-768, March.
    16. James J. Heckman, 2008. "Econometric Causality," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 76(1), pages 1-27, April.
    17. McCarthy, Mary R. & Salant, Priscilla, 1986. "The Off-Farm Labor Supply of Married Farm Women: Evidence from Wisconsin," Staff Papers 200447, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    18. Zamnius, Alexey & Polbin, Andrey, 2021. "Estimating intertemporal elasticity of substitution of labor supply for married women in Russia," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 64, pages 23-48.
    19. Villarreal, Francisco G., 2014. "Financial Services and Household Inequality in Mexico," MPRA Paper 57075, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Takashi Yamagata & Chris Orme, 2005. "On Testing Sample Selection Bias Under the Multicollinearity Problem," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(4), pages 467-481.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness;

    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:aaea03:22119. 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/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.