IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/revage/v25y2003i1p145-153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Has the Market's Estimate of Crop Price Variability Increased since the 1996 Farm Bill?

Author

Listed:
  • Carl R. Zulauf
  • E. Neal Blue

Abstract

Following enactment of the 1996 Farm Bill, corn and soybean implied volatilities covering the preharvest and storage seasons increased 16–23% between 1987–1995 and 1997–2001. The increase was statistically significant at the 90% confidence level. Standard deviation of corn and soybean prices derived from the implied volatilities increased 7–25%, but only the increase for preharvest corn was statistically significant. Further muddling the picture is the decline in variability of annual U.S. average corn and soybean cash price. These mixed findings point to continuing disagreement about government's role in managing farm risk in the post-1996 Farm Bill world. Copyright 2003, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Carl R. Zulauf & E. Neal Blue, 2003. "Has the Market's Estimate of Crop Price Variability Increased since the 1996 Farm Bill?," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(1), pages 145-153.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:revage:v:25:y:2003:i:1:p:145-153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/1467-9353.00050
    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. McPhail, Lihong Lu & Babcock, Bruce A., 2012. "Impact of US biofuel policy on US corn and gasoline price variability," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 505-513.
    2. Elanor Starmer & Aimee Witteman & Timothy A. Wise, "undated". "Feeding the Factory Farm: Implicit Subsidies to the Broiler Chicken Industry," GDAE Working Papers 06-03, GDAE, Tufts University.

    More about this item

    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:oup:revage:v:25:y:2003:i:1:p:145-153. 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 or Christopher F. Baum (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.