IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea03/22020.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Optimal Grazing Pressure Under Output Price And Production Uncertainty With Alternative Functional Forms

Author

Listed:
  • Kaitibie, Simeon
  • Nganje, William E.
  • Brorsen, B. Wade
  • Epplin, Francis M.

Abstract

This study uses a Cox parametric bootstrap test to select between two specifications of the von Liebig hypothesis, a switching regression model and a non-linear mixed stochastic plateau function. The selected production function was used to determine optimal stocking density for dual-purpose winter wheat, under production and output price uncertainty. The switching regression approach was rejected in favor of the non-linear mixed stochastic plateau function. The relatively small difference in optimal stocking density between risk aversion and risk neutrality suggests that risk-aversion is much less important in explaining producer response to uncertainty than is nonlinearity in the production function.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaitibie, Simeon & Nganje, William E. & Brorsen, B. Wade & Epplin, Francis M., 2003. "Optimal Grazing Pressure Under Output Price And Production Uncertainty With Alternative Functional Forms," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22020, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea03:22020
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.22020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/22020/files/sp03ka05.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.22020?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. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G, 1981. "Several Tests for Model Specification in the Presence of Alternative Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 781-793, May.
    2. Maddala, G S & Nelson, Forrest D, 1974. "Maximum Likelihood Methods for Models of Markets in Disequilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 42(6), pages 1013-1030, November.
    3. Li, Jau-Rong & Barrett, Christopher B., 1999. "Distinguishing Between Equilibrium And Integration In Markets Analysis," Working Papers 14607, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    4. Quirino Paris, 1992. "The von Liebig Hypothesis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(4), pages 1019-1028.
    5. Robert G. Chambers & John Quiggin, 2001. "Decomposing Input Adjustments under Price and Production Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(1), pages 20-34.
    6. Dameus, Alix & Brorsen, B. Wade & Sukhdial, Kullapapruk Piewthongngam & Richter, Francisca G.-C., 2001. "Aids Versus Rotterdam: A Cox Nonnested Test With Parametric Bootstrap," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20453, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Christopher B. Barrett & Jau Rong Li, 2002. "Distinguishing between Equilibrium and Integration in Spatial Price Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(2), pages 292-307.
    8. Peter Berck & Gloria Helfand, 1990. "Reconciling the von Liebig and Differentiable Crop Production Functions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(4), pages 985-996.
    9. Hashem Pesaran, M. & Pesaran, Bahram, 1993. "A simulation approach to the problem of computing Cox's statistic for testing nonnested models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1-3), pages 377-392.
    10. L. Allen Torell & Kenneth S. Lyon & E. Bruce Godfrey, 1991. "Long-Run versus Short-Run Planning Horizons and the Rangeland Stocking Rate Decision," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(3), pages 795-807.
    11. Robert G. Chambers & Erik Lichtenberg, 1996. "A Nonparametric Approach to the von Liebig-Paris Technology," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(2), pages 373-386.
    12. Murat Isik, 2002. "Resource Management under Production and Output Price Uncertainty: Implications for Environmental Policy," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(3), pages 557-571.
    13. Quirino Paris & Keith Knapp, 1989. "Estimation of von Liebig Response Functions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 71(1), pages 178-186.
    14. N. Coulibaly & B. Wade Brorsen, 1999. "Monte carlo sampling approach to testing nonnested hypothesis: monte carlo results," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 195-209.
    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. Tembo, Gelson & Brorsen, B. Wade & Epplin, Francis M., 2003. "Linear Response Stochastic Plateau Functions," 2003 Annual Meeting, February 1-5, 2003, Mobile, Alabama 35217, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    2. Livanis, Grigorios T. & Salois, Matthew J. & Moss, Charles B., 2009. "A Nonparametric Kernel Representation of the Agricultural Production Function: Implications for Economic Measures of Technology," 83rd Annual Conference, March 30 - April 1, 2009, Dublin, Ireland 51063, Agricultural Economics Society.
    3. Roberts, David C. & Brorsen, B. Wade & Solie, John B. & Raun, William R., 2011. "The effect of parameter uncertainty on whole-field nitrogen recommendations from nitrogen-rich strips and ramped strips in winter wheat," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(4), pages 307-314, April.
    4. Peter Berck & Jacqueline Geoghegan & Stephen Stohs, 2000. "A Strong Test of the von Liebig Hypothesis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 948-955.
    5. Klaus Moeltner & A. Ford Ramsey & Clinton L. Neill, 2021. "Bayesian Kinked Regression with Unobserved Thresholds: An Application to the von Liebig Hypothesis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(5), pages 1832-1856, October.
    6. Kapetanios, G. & Weeks, M., 2003. "Non-nested Models and the likelihood Ratio Statistic: A Comparison of Simulation and Bootstrap-based Tests," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0308, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    7. Flichman, Guillermo & Jacquet, Florence, 2003. "Le couplage des modèles agronomiques et économiques : intérêt pour l'analyse des politiques," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 67.
    8. Park, Seong C. & Brorsen, B. Wade & Stoecker, Arthur L. & Hattey, Jeffory A., 2012. "Forage Response to Swine Effluent: A Cox Nonnested Test of Alternative Functional Forms Using a Fast Double Bootstrap," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(4), pages 593-606, November.
    9. Guillermo Flichman & Florence Jacquet, 2003. "Le couplage des modèles agronomiques et économiques : intérêt pour l'analyse des politiques," Post-Print hal-01201042, HAL.
    10. Dameus, Alix & Brorsen, B. Wade & Sukhdial, Kullapapruk Piewthongngam & Richter, Francisca G.-C., 2001. "Aids Versus Rotterdam: A Cox Nonnested Test With Parametric Bootstrap," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20453, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Guillermo Flichman & Florence Jacquet, 2003. "Le couplage des modèles agronomiques et économiques : intérêt pour l'analyse des politiques," Cahiers d'Economie et Sociologie Rurales, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 67, pages 51-69.
    12. Lichtenberg, Erik, 2002. "Agriculture and the environment," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 23, pages 1249-1313, Elsevier.
    13. Llewelyn, Richard V. & Featherstone, Allen M., 1997. "A comparison of crop production functions using simulated data for irrigated corn in western Kansas," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 521-538, August.
    14. Wu, JunJie & Zilberman, David & Babcock, Bruce A., 2001. "Environmental and Distributional Impacts of Conservation Targeting Strategies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 333-350, May.
    15. Kampas, Athanasios & Petsakos, Athanasios & Rozakis, Stelios, 2012. "Price induced irrigation water saving: Unraveling conflicts and synergies between European agricultural and water policies for a Greek Water District," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 28-38.
    16. Paulson, Nicholas D. & Babcock, Bruce A., 2010. "Readdressing the Fertilizer Problem," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 35(3), pages 1-17, December.
    17. McAleer, Michael, 1995. "The significance of testing empirical non-nested models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 149-171, May.
    18. Kaitibie, Simeon & Epplin, Francis M. & Brorsen, B. Wade & Horn, Gerald W. & Krenzer, Eugene G., Jr. & Paisley, Steven I., 2002. "Derivation And Optimization Of A Stochastic Livestock Weight Gain Response To Stocking Density Model," 2002 Annual Meeting, July 28-31, 2002, Long Beach, California 36538, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    19. J. M. C. Santos Silva, 2001. "A score test for non-nested hypotheses with applications to discrete data models," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(5), pages 577-597.
    20. David A. Hennessy, 2009. "Crop Yield Skewness Under Law of the Minimum Technology," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 197-208.

    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:aaea03:22020. 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.