IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea20/304329.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Payment versus Charitable Donations to Attract Producer Survey Participation

Author

Listed:
  • Penn, Jerrod
  • Hu, Wuyang
  • Alfaro-Inocente, Adriana
  • Bastola, Sapana

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Penn, Jerrod & Hu, Wuyang & Alfaro-Inocente, Adriana & Bastola, Sapana, 2020. "Payment versus Charitable Donations to Attract Producer Survey Participation," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304329, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea20:304329
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.304329
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/304329/files/18311.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.304329?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. Luca Sartore & Kelly Toppin & Linda Young & Clifford Spiegelman, 2019. "Developing Integer Calibration Weights for Census of Agriculture," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 24(1), pages 26-48, March.
    2. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, November.
    3. McCarthy, Jaki & Beckler, Daniel G., 2000. "Survey Burden and its Impact on Attitudes Toward the Survey Sponsor," NASS Research Reports 235077, United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service.
    4. Bruce D. Meyer & Wallace K. C. Mok & James X. Sullivan, 2015. "Household Surveys in Crisis," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(4), pages 199-226, Fall.
    5. Scott Dawson & Dave Dickinson, 1988. "Conducting International Mail Surveys: The Effect of Incentives on Response Rates with an Industry Population," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 19(3), pages 491-496, September.
    6. Jeremy G. Weber & Dawn Marie Clay, 2013. "Who Does Dot Respond to the Agricultural Resource Management Survey and Does It Matter?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 95(3), pages 755-771.
    7. John L. Czajka & Amy Beyler, "undated". "Declining Response Rates in Federal Surveys: Trends and Implications (Background Paper)," Mathematica Policy Research Reports a714f76e878f4a74a6ad9f15d, Mathematica Policy Research.
    8. Johansson, Robert & Effland, Anne & Coble, Keith, 2017. "Falling Response Rates to USDA Crop Surveys: Why It Matters," farmdoc daily, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, vol. 7, January.
    9. J Saunders & D Jobber & V Mitchell, 2006. "The optimum prepaid monetary incentives for mail surveys," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(10), pages 1224-1230, October.
    10. Reist, Benjamin M. & Rodhouse, Joseph B. & Ball, Shane T. & Young, Linda J., 2019. "Subsampling of Nonrespondents in the 2017 Census of Agriculture," NASS Research Reports 322826, United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service.
    11. repec:ags:unassr:235077 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Zhong, Hua & Hu, Wuyang & Penn, Jerrod M., 2018. "Application of Multiple Imputation in Dealing with Missing Data in Agricultural Surveys: The Case of BMP Adoption," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(01), January.
    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. Boris E. Bravo‐Ureta & Víctor H. Moreira & Javier L. Troncoso & Alan Wall, 2020. "Plot‐level technical efficiency accounting for farm‐level effects: Evidence from Chilean wine grape producers," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(6), pages 811-824, November.
    2. Agnieszka Chidlow & Pervez N. Ghauri, 2014. "What incentives are being used by International Business Researchers in Their Surveys? A Review," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series wp1086, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    3. Stephanie Rosch & Sharon Raszap Skorbiansky & Collin Weigel & Kent D. Messer & Daniel Hellerstein, 2021. "Barriers to Using Economic Experiments in Evidence‐Based Agricultural Policymaking," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(2), pages 531-555, June.
    4. GwanSeon Kim & Mehdi Nemati & Steven Buck & Nicholas Pates & Tyler Mark, 2020. "Recovering Forecast Distributions of Crop Composition: Method and Application to Kentucky Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Brittney Goodrich & Marieke Fenton & Jerrod Penn & John Bovay & Travis Mountain, 2023. "Battling bots: Experiences and strategies to mitigate fraudulent responses in online surveys," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(2), pages 762-784, June.
    6. Herbst, Chris M., 2018. "The rising cost of child care in the United States: A reassessment of the evidence," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 13-30.
    7. Zhifeng Gao & Ted C. Schroeder, 2009. "Consumer responses to new food quality information: are some consumers more sensitive than others?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 339-346, May.
    8. Abdullah, Sabah & Mariel, Petr, 2010. "Choice experiment study on the willingness to pay to improve electricity services," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4570-4581, August.
    9. Gallardo, R. Karina & Wang, Qianqian, 2013. "Willingness to Pay for Pesticides' Environmental Features and Social Desirability Bias: The Case of Apple and Pear Growers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(01), pages 1-16, April.
    10. Tin Cheuk Leung, 2013. "What Is the True Loss Due to Piracy? Evidence from Microsoft Office in Hong Kong," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(3), pages 1018-1029, July.
    11. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    12. Robert Turner, 2013. "Using contingent choice surveys to inform national park management," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 3(2), pages 120-138, June.
    13. Bodo Herzog, 2018. "Valuation of Digital Platforms: Experimental Evidence for Google and Facebook," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-13, October.
    14. Johnson, F. Reed & Ozdemir, Semra & Phillips, Kathryn A., 2010. "Effects of simplifying choice tasks on estimates of taste heterogeneity in stated-choice surveys," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 183-190, January.
    15. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    16. Potoglou, Dimitris & Palacios, Juan & Feijoo, Claudio & Gómez Barroso, Jose-Luis, 2015. "The supply of personal information: A study on the determinants of information provision in e-commerce scenarios," 26th European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2015 127174, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    17. Sant'Anna, Ana Claudia & Bergtold, Jason & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Caldas, Marcellus & Granco, Gabriel, 2021. "Deal or No Deal? Analysis of Bioenergy Feedstock Contract Choice with Multiple Opt-out Options and Contract Attribute Substitutability," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315289, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Joanna Coast & Hareth Al‐Janabi & Eileen J. Sutton & Susan A. Horrocks & A. Jane Vosper & Dawn R. Swancutt & Terry N. Flynn, 2012. "Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: issues and recommendations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 730-741, June.
    19. Bond, Craig A. & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Bond, Jennifer Keeling, 2008. "What to Choose? The Value of Label Claims to Fresh Produce Consumers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-26.
    20. Kontoleon Andreas & Yabe Mitsuyasu, 2006. "Market Segmentation Analysis of Preferences for GM Derived Animal Foods in the UK," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-38, December.

    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:aaea20:304329. 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.