This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Valuing the Roundup Ready® Soybean Weed Management Program

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Aultman, Stephen
Hurley, Terrance M.
Mitchell, Paul D.
Frisvold, George

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

This study examines soybean grower adoption of the Roundup Ready® (RR) weed management program with and without a residual herbicide application, and grower concerns regarding weed resistance to herbicides using telephone survey data from of 357 growers in 2007. It also estimates the pecuniary and non-pecuniary benefits enjoyed by growers from their RR program. The results indicate that soybean growers planned to treat 29 percent of their RR acres with a residual herbicide in 2008. More than half (53%) of the growers survey were concerned about weed resistance. The estimated expected benefit of the RR program in 2008 was $10.17 per acre, which translates into about $727 million with 75.7 million acres of soybean in the U.S. in 2008. The estimated value per acre of the RR program with and without a residual was $8.78 and $12.83. The estimates also suggest that if growers were not using residual herbicides with the RR program, their benefits would be 28.4% lower. Alternatively, if all growers were required to use residual herbicides on their RR acres, the value of the RR program would be 46% lower. Simply increasing grower weed resistance concerns could increase residual herbicide use on RR acres by up to 7%. The same increase in residual herbicide use could be accomplished by decreasing the cost of residual herbicide applications on RR acres by $0.81 per acre.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/49342
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Agricultural and Applied Economics Association in its series 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin with number 49342.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea09:49342

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Email:
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).

Related research
Keywords: Roundup Ready; Soybean; Glyphosate; Weed Resistance; Benefits; Crop Production/Industries; Demand and Price Analysis; Farm Management; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies;

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & McBride, William D., 2002. "Adoption Of Bioengineered Crops," Agricultural Economics Reports 33957, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You can use convenient plug-ins to search directly IDEAS from your browser.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-26.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.