IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/aareaj/161974.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of yield and price risk on conversion from conventional to organic farming

Author

Listed:
  • Acs, Szvetlana
  • Berentsen, Paul B.M.
  • Huirne, Ruud
  • van Asseldonk, Marcel

Abstract

Although the benefits of organic farming are already well known, the conversion to organic farming does not proceed as the Dutch government expected. In order to investigate the conversion decisions of Dutch arable farms, a discrete stochastic dynamic utility-efficient programming (DUEP) model is developed with special attention for yield and price risk of conventional, conversion and organic crops. The model maximizes the expected utility of the farmer depending on the farmer’s risk attitude. The DUEP model is an extension of a dynamic linear programming model that maximized the labour income of conversion from conventional to organic farming over a 10 year planning horizon. The DUEP model was used to model a typical farm for the central clay region in the Netherlands. The results show that for a risk-neutral farmer it is optimal to convert to organic farming. However, for a more risk-averse farmer it is only optimal to fully convert if policy incentives are applied such as taxes on pesticides or subsidies on conversion, or if the market for the organic products becomes more stable.

Suggested Citation

  • Acs, Szvetlana & Berentsen, Paul B.M. & Huirne, Ruud & van Asseldonk, Marcel, 2009. "Effect of yield and price risk on conversion from conventional to organic farming," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(3), September.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aareaj:161974
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/161974
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James A. Langley & Earl O. Heady & Kent D. Olson, 1982. "Macro Implications of a Complete Transformation of U.S. Agricultural Production to Organic Farming Practices," Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) Publications 82-wp9, Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) at Iowa State University.
    2. David K. Lambert & Bruce A. McCarl, 1985. "Risk Modeling Using Direct Solution of Nonlinear Approximations of the Utility Function," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 67(4), pages 846-852.
    3. Lien, Gudbrand & Hardaker, J. Brian & Asseldonk, Marcel A.P.M. van & Richardson, James W., 2009. "Risk programming and sparse data: how to get more reliable results," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 101(1-2), pages 42-48, June.
    4. Harwood, Joy L. & Heifner, Richard G. & Coble, Keith H. & Perry, Janet E. & Somwaru, Agapi, 1999. "Managing Risk in Farming: Concepts, Research, and Analysis," Agricultural Economics Reports 34081, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    5. Flaten, O. & Lien, G., 2007. "Stochastic utility-efficient programming of organic dairy farms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1574-1583, September.
    6. Allan N. Rae, 1971. "Stochastic Programming, Utility, and Sequential Decision Problems in Farm Management," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 53(3), pages 448-460.
    7. Richardson, James W. & Klose, Steven L. & Gray, Allan W., 2000. "An Applied Procedure For Estimating And Simulating Multivariate Empirical (Mve) Probability Distributions In Farm-Level Risk Assessment And Policy Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 32(02), August.
    8. K. D. Cocks, 1968. "Discrete Stochastic Programming," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 72-79, September.
    9. Pannell, David J. & Malcolm, Bill & Kingwell, Ross S., 2000. "Are we risking too much? Perspectives on risk in farm modelling," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 23(1), June.
    10. Martin, Sandra, 1996. "Risk Management Strategies in New Zealand Agriculture and Horticulture," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(01), April.
    11. G Lien & JB Hardaker, 2001. "Whole-farm planning under uncertainty: impacts of subsidy scheme and utility function on portfolio choice in Norwegian agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 28(1), pages 17-36, March.
    12. J. Brian Hardaker & Louise H. Patten & David J. Pannell, 1988. "Utility‐Efficient Programming For Whole‐Farm Planning," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 32(2-3), pages 88-97, 08-12.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. van Winsen, Frankwin & Wauters, Erwin & Lauwers, Ludwig H. & de Mey, Yann & Van Passel, Steven & Vancauteren, Mark, 2011. "Combining risk perception and risk attitude: A comprehensive individual risk behavior model," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115749, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Hermann, Daniel & Musshoff, Oliver & Agethen, Katrin, 2014. "I will never switch sides: an experimental approach to determine drivers for investment decisions of conventional and organic hog farmers," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183084, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Chopin, Pierre & Doré, Thierry & Guindé, Loïc & Blazy, Jean-Marc, 2015. "MOSAICA: A multi-scale bioeconomic model for the design and ex ante assessment of cropping system mosaics," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 26-39.
    4. repec:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:4:p:545-:d:94918 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Saem Lee & Trung Thanh Nguyen & Patrick Poppenborg & Hio-Jung Shin & Thomas Koellner, 2016. "Conventional, Partially Converted and Environmentally Friendly Farming in South Korea: Profitability and Factors Affecting Farmers’ Choice," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(8), pages 1-18, July.
    6. repec:spr:endesu:v:19:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s10668-016-9800-0 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Gandorfer, Markus & Pannell, David & Meyer-Aurich, Andreas, 2011. "Analyzing the effects of risk and uncertainty on optimal tillage and nitrogen fertilizer intensity for field crops in Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(8), pages 615-622, October.
    8. Uematsu, Hiroki & Mishra, Ashok K., 2012. "Organic farmers or conventional farmers: Where's the money?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 55-62.
    9. Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2014. "Do organic farmers feel happier than conventional ones? An exploratory analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 38-43.
    10. Ridier, Aude & Chaib, Karim & Roussy, Caroline, 2016. "A Dynamic Stochastic Programming model of crop rotation choice to test the adoption of long rotation under price and production risks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 252(1), pages 270-279.
    11. repec:eee:agisys:v:159:y:2018:i:c:p:111-125 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Wauters, Erwin & De Cock, Lieve & Wit, Jan de & Lauwers, Ludwig H., 2011. "The foregone risk premium: a communicative and practical method for the evaluation of risk-return profiles in agriculture," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115737, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Aude Ridier & Karim Chaib & Caroline Roussy, 2012. "The adoption of innovative cropping systems under price and production risks: a dynamic model of crop rotation choice," Working Papers hal-01208817, HAL.
    14. Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2011. "Farmers adoption of integrated crop protection and organic farming: Do moral and social concerns matter?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1536-1545, June.
    15. Chavez, M.D. & Berentsen, P.B.M. & Oude Lansink, A.G.J.M., 2014. "Analyzing diversification possibilities on specialized tobacco farms in Argentina using a bio-economic farm model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 35-43.
    16. Nicolai V. Kuminoff & Ada Wossink, 2010. "Why Isn't More US Farmland Organic?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 240-258.

    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:aareaj:161974. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.