IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/remaae/12253.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Elicitation of Subjective Probabilities with Applications in Agricultural Economics

Author

Listed:
  • Norris, Patricia E.
  • Kramer, Randall A.

Abstract

Probability judgements are important components of decision making under uncertainty. In particular, economic decisions can be aided by assuring more accurate assessment of probabilities and more realistic modelling of economic problems through the inclusion of subjective probabilities. The purpose of this paper is to describe the techniques which can be used to elicit subjective probabilities and the ways in which these techniques can be incorporated into agricultural economics research. The review draws from the statistics, psychology, management, operations research, meteorology and economics literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Norris, Patricia E. & Kramer, Randall A., 1990. "The Elicitation of Subjective Probabilities with Applications in Agricultural Economics," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 58, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:remaae:12253
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/12253
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:bla:joares:v:16:y:1978:i:2:p:225-241 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Griffiths, William E. & Anderson, Jock R. & Hamal, K.B., 1987. "Subjective Distributions As Econometric Response Data," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 31(02), August.
    3. Tom Knight & S. R. Johnson & Robert M. Finley, 1985. "Farmers' Subjective Probabilities in Northern Thailand: Comment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 67(1), pages 147-148.
    4. Anderson, Jock R. & Feder, Gershon, 2007. "Agricultural Extension," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, Elsevier.
    5. Joseph J. Moder & E. G. Rodgers, 1968. "Judgment Estimates of the Moments of Pert Type Distributions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 76-83, October.
    6. Emilio M. Francisco & Jock R. Anderson, 1972. "Chance And Choice West Of The Darling," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 16(2), pages 82-93, August.
    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. Terrance Hurley & Jason Shogren, 2005. "An Experimental Comparison of Induced and Elicited Beliefs," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 169-188, January.
    2. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "A methodological proposal to approach farmers’ adoption behavior: stated preferences and perceptions of the innovation," Post-Print hal-01123260, HAL.
    3. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    4. Crosthwaite, Jim & McMahon, Ian, 1992. "Economic Issues and the Protection of Endangered Species," 1992 Conference (36th), February 10-13, 1992, Canberra, Australia 146435, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    5. Shaik, Saleem & Coble, Keith H. & Knight, Thomas O. & Baquet, Alan E. & Patrick, George F., 2008. "Crop Revenue and Yield Insurance Demand: A Subjective Probability Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(03), pages 757-766, December.
    6. Agarwal, Sandip Kumar, 2017. "Subjective beliefs and decision making under uncertainty in the field," ISU General Staff Papers 201701010800006248, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Agarwal, Sandip & Jacobs, Keri L. & Weninger, Quinn, 2016. "Elicitation of Subjective Beliefs: A Pilot study of farmers' nitrogen management decision-making in Central Iowa," ISU General Staff Papers 201601010800001005, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    8. Hardaker, J. Brian & Lien, Gudbrand, 2010. "Probabilities for decision analysis in agriculture and rural resource economics: The need for a paradigm change," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(6), pages 345-350, July.
    9. Delavande, Adeline & Giné, Xavier & McKenzie, David, 2011. "Measuring subjective expectations in developing countries: A critical review and new evidence," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 151-163, March.
    10. Toland, Gerald Jr & Schmiesing, Brian H. & Black, J. Roy, 1989. "Analysis and Comparison of Alternative Estimations of Crop Yield Probability Distributions," 1989 Annual Meeting, June 9-12, 1989, Coeur d/Alene, Idaho 244976, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    11. Torkamani, Javad, 2006. "Measuring and Incorporating Farmers’ Personal Beliefs and Preferences about Uncertain Events in Decision Analysis: A Stochastic Programming Experiment," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 61(2).
    12. Langrock, Ines & Hurley, Terrance M., 2006. "Risk Preferences, Perceptions and Systematic Biases," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21343, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Sudha Narayanan, 2012. "Safe gambles? Farmer perceptions of transactional certainty and risk-return tradeoffs in contract farming schemes in Southern India," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2012-021, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    14. Clop-Gallart, M. Merce & Juarez-Rubio, Francisco, 2005. "Elicitation of Subjective Crop Yield PDF for DSS Implementation," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24561, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Cerroni, Simone & Shaw, W. Douglass, 2012. "Does climate change information affect stated risks of pine beetle impacts on forests? An application of the exchangeability method," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 72-84.
    16. Milne, Mary & Godden, David P. & Kennedy, John O.S. & Kambuou, Rosa N., 1999. "Evaluating the Benefits of Conserved Crop Germplasm in PNG," 1999 Conference (43th), January 20-22, 1999, Christchurch, New Zealand 124091, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research Methods/ Statistical Methods;

    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:remaae:12253. 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.