IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Farmer demand for financial record-keeping system attributes

Listed author(s):
  • Christopher A. Wolf

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to determine which financial record-keeping system farmers use, as well as what system attributes farmers value and to what degree. Design/methodology/approach - This research uses a choice experiment to examine farmer's demand for attributes of financial record-keeping systems. A sample from the general Michigan farm population is compared to samples from university and agribusiness record system clients. Findings - Results reveal that university and agribusiness clients are willing to pay considerably more for a farm-specific record system to backstop their farm management decisions. Practical implications - The results provide an understanding of farmer demands for farm financial record systems and can be used to position record-keeping systems to meet those demands. Originality/value - This paper describes and analyzes farm financial accounting system use and preferences by type.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/00021461111152609?utm_campaign=RePEc&WT.mc_id=RePEc
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Emerald Group Publishing in its journal Agricultural Finance Review.

Volume (Year): 71 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (August)
Pages: 259-276

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eme:afrpps:v:71:y:2011:i:2:p:259-276
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com

Order Information: Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK
Web: http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/journals.htm?id=afr Email:


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.:

as
in new window


  1. Lawrence Rubey & Frank Lupi, 1997. "Predicting the Effects of Market Reform in Zimbabwe: A Stated Preference Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(1), pages 89-99.
  2. Gloy, Brent A. & Hyde, Jeffrey & LaDue, Eddy L., 2002. "Dairy Farm Management and Long-Term Farm Financial Performance," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 31(2), October.
  3. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(8), pages 827-840.
  4. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, Diciembre.
  5. Jayson L. Lusk & Darren Hudson, 2004. "Willingness-to-Pay Estimates and Their Relevance to Agribusiness Decision Making," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 152-169.
  6. Jayson L. Lusk & Jutta Roosen & John A. Fox, 2003. "Demand for Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison of Consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 16-29.
  7. Cummings, Ronald G & Harrison, Glenn W & Rutstrom, E Elisabet, 1995. "Homegrown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous Choice Approach Incentive-Compatible?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 260-266, March.
  8. Wayne H. Howard & Glen C. Filson, 1994. "An Evaluation of the Ontario Farm Business Management Association Program," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 42(3), pages 327-341, November.
  9. T.S. Jayne & Lawrence Rubey & Frank Lupi & David Tschirley & Michael T. Weber, 1996. "Estimating Consumer Response to Food Market Reform Using Stated Preference Data: Evidence from Eastern and Southern Africa," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(3), pages 820-824.
  10. Tonsor, Glynn T. & Schroeder, Ted C. & Fox, John A. & Biere, Arlo W., 2005. "European Preferences for Beef Steak Attributes," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(02), August.
  11. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
  12. Karen Blumenschein & Magnus Johannesson & Glenn C. Blomquist & Bengt Liljas & Richard M. O’Conor, 1998. "Experimental Results on Expressed Certainty and Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 65(1), pages 169-177, July.
  13. Brian Roe & Thomas L. Sporleder & Betsy Belleville, 2004. "Hog Producer Preferences for Marketing Contract Attributes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 115-123.
  14. Maria L. Loureiro & Jill J. McCluskey & Ron C. Mittelhammer, 2003. "Are Stated Preferences Good Predictors of Market Behavior?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(1), pages 44-45.
  15. Marcellino, Dana M. & Wilson, Christine A., 2006. "Valuing Farm Financial Information," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21243, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:afrpps:v:71:y:2011:i:2:p:259-276. 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: (Virginia Chapman)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.