IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/afrpps/v75y2015i4p469-483.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reconciling information gaps in organic farm borrowers’ dealings with farm lenders

Author

Listed:
  • Ghangela Jones
  • Cesar Escalante
  • Hofner Rusiana

Abstract

Purpose - – Organic outputs have been increasing at much lower rates than growth in consumer demand. Organic farmers’ debt aversion hinders them from obtaining business funds through borrowing. The purpose of this paper is to clarify that the farmers’ reluctance to use debt as a funding option can be more attributed to gaps in existing borrower-lender relationships, beyond sustainability principles. Design/methodology/approach - – Empirical evidence collected from organic farmers and farm lenders establish differing expectations and perceptions that reinforce the organic farmers’ debt aversion. The farm lender survey data set was analyzed using the Heckman approach applied to two lenders’ decisions: their interest in lending to organic farm borrowers and loan amounts approved for successful loan applicants. The econometric results were reconciled with the compiled inputs provided by organic farmers interviewed. Findings - – Results validate the farmers’ lower reliance on loans due to suspicions that lenders lack knowledge and consideration of organic farming conditions and principles. Farm lenders must depart from employing a uniform credit risk appraisal model and adopt borrower-specific versions of the model, but not necessarily delineating organic-conventional farming dichotomy that may not substantially affect credit risk measurement. Organic farms, on the other hand, need to better understand the credit risk appraisal principles and use their inherent business strengths to compete for loans with conventional farms without any special consideration. Practical implications - – Borrower-lender relationships can improve if information gaps between lenders and borrowers can be minimized with more extensive outreach education efforts. Better relationships would increase organic farms’ credit access to effectively address an impending supply gap in an expanding industry. Originality/value - – To the knowledge, a specific focus on organic farms in understanding farm borrower-lender relationships has never been explored in literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Ghangela Jones & Cesar Escalante & Hofner Rusiana, 2015. "Reconciling information gaps in organic farm borrowers’ dealings with farm lenders," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 75(4), pages 469-483, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:afrpps:v:75:y:2015:i:4:p:469-483
    DOI: 10.1108/AFR-01-2015-0002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AFR-01-2015-0002/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AFR-01-2015-0002/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AFR-01-2015-0002?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
    ---><---

    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. Oranuch Wongpiyabovorn & Alejandro Plastina & John M. Crespi, 2023. "Challenges to voluntary Ag carbon markets," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(2), pages 1154-1167, June.

    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:eme:afrpps:v:75:y:2015:i:4:p:469-483. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.