IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jagaec/v29y1997i02p225-242_00.html

Estimating Insecticide Application Frequencies: A Comparison of Geometric and Other Count Data Models

Author

Listed:
  • Hubbell, Bryan J.

Abstract

The number of insecticide applications made by an apple grower to control an insect infestation is modeled as a geometric random variable. Insecticide efficacy, rate per application, month of treatment, and method of application all have significant impacts on the expected number of applications. The number of applications to control a given insect population is dependent on the probability of achieving successful control with a given application. Results suggest that northeastern growers have the highest and mid-Atlantic growers the lowest probability of controlling an infestation with a given application. Results also indicate that scales require the least and moths the most number of applications. Growers are not responsive to per unit insecticide prices, but respond negatively to insecticide toxicity, supporting findings from previous pesticide demand analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Hubbell, Bryan J., 1997. "Estimating Insecticide Application Frequencies: A Comparison of Geometric and Other Count Data Models," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 225-242, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:29:y:1997:i:02:p:225-242_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1074070800007744/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Lichtenberg, Erik & Berlind, Ayesha Velderman, 2005. "Does It Matter Who Scouts?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(2), pages 1-18, August.

    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:cup:jagaec:v:29:y:1997:i:02:p:225-242_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aae .

    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.