IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v86y2004i1p175-184.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recruiting Agricultural Economics Graduate Students: Student Demand for Program Attributes

Author

Listed:
  • Darrell R. Mark
  • Jayson L. Lusk
  • M. Scott Daniel

Abstract

We use data from an Internet and traditional print mail survey to determine student demand for graduate program attributes. Results reveal that students value graduate program ranking more than stipend level, geographic location, or office/computer facilities. Higher ranked programs, as a whole, may be able to offer substantially lower stipends to students and remain competitive with lower ranked programs. Results also suggest that students might be willing to accept higher stipends or office space to attend lower ranked schools. The results may provide graduate program leaders with information to improve their recruitment efforts and/or potentially reduce graduate program expenditures. Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Darrell R. Mark & Jayson L. Lusk & M. Scott Daniel, 2004. "Recruiting Agricultural Economics Graduate Students: Student Demand for Program Attributes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 175-184.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:86:y:2004:i:1:p:175-184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00570.x
    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 below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mary A. Marchant & Lydia Zepeda, 1995. "The Agricultural Economics Profession at the Crossroads: Survey Results of Faculty Salary, Employment, and Hiring Prospects," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(5), pages 1322-1328.
    2. Mark, Darrell R. & Daniel, M. Scott & Lusk, Jayson L., 2002. "Comparing Agricultural Economics Graduate Programs: What Are Prospective Students Options?," Reports 140494, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    3. Roe, Brian & Boyle, Kevin J. & Teisl, Mario F., 1996. "Using Conjoint Analysis to Derive Estimates of Compensating Variation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 145-159, September.
    4. repec:ags:nbaesp:140494 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Schmidt, Alejandro & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Paredes, Ricardo D., 2019. "Heterogeneity and college choice: Latent class modelling for improved policy making," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 33(C).
    2. Barkley, Andrew P. & Parrish, Dena, 2005. "The Selection of a Major Field of Study in the College of Agriculture at Kansas State University," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19275, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Penn, Jerrod & Sandberg, H. Mikael, 2013. "Agricultural and Resource Economics Ph.D. Students: Who are They and What Do They Want?," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 151138, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Dennis Fok & Richard Paap & Bram Van Dijk, 2012. "A Rank‐Ordered Logit Model With Unobserved Heterogeneity In Ranking Capabilities," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(5), pages 831-846, August.
    5. Banerjee, Swagata (Ban) & Martin, Steven W. & Hudson, Darren, 2006. "A Choice-Based Conjoint Experiment with Genetically Engineered Cotton in the Mississippi Delta," 2006 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2006, Orlando, Florida 35389, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Atallah, Shadi S. & Huang, Ju-Chin & Leahy, Jessica & Bennett, Karen, 2020. "Preference Heterogeneity and Neighborhood Effect in Invasive Species Control: The Case of Glossy Buckthorn in New Hampshire and Maine Forests," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304623, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Jiao, Yang & Qi, Li & Chen, Zhuo, 2023. "Academic profile of Chinese economists: Productivity, pay, time use, gender differences, and impacts of COVID-19," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    3. Loomis, John B. & Ekstrand, Earl, 1997. "Economic Benefits Of Critical Habitat For The Mexican Spotted Owl: A Scope Test Using A Multiple-Bounded Contingent Valuation Survey," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(2), pages 1-11, December.
    4. Kim, Junghun & Seung, Hyunchan & Lee, Jongsu & Ahn, Joongha, 2020. "Asymmetric preference and loss aversion for electric vehicles: The reference-dependent choice model capturing different preference directions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    5. del Saz Salazar, Salvador & Hernandez Sancho, Francesc & Sala Garrido, Ramon, 2009. "Estimación del valor económico de la calidad del agua de un río mediante una doble aproximación: una aplicación de los principios económicos de la Directiva Marco del Agua," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(01), pages 1-27.
    6. Chunhua Wang & Changdong Zhang & Yong Wang, 2020. "Environmental satisfaction among residents in Chinese cities," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(5), pages 2283-2301, November.
    7. Stevens, T. & Porras, I. & Halstead, J. & Harper, W. & Hill, B. & Willis, C., 2000. "Valuing Visbility in Northeastern Wilderness Areas," Western Region Archives 321667, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    8. Emma McIntosh, 2006. "Using Discrete Choice Experiments within a Cost-Benefit Analysis Framework," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 24(9), pages 855-868, September.
    9. Harrison, R. Wes & Mclennon, Everald, 2004. "Analysis of Consumer Preferences for Biotech Labeling Formats," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(01), pages 1-13, April.
    10. Stevens, T. H. & Belkner, R. & Dennis, D. & Kittredge, D. & Willis, C., 2000. "Comparison of contingent valuation and conjoint analysis in ecosystem management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 63-74, January.
    11. Mueller, Milton L. & Park, Yuri & Lee, Jongsu & Kim, Tai-Yoo, 2006. "Digital identity: How users value the attributes of online identifiers," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 405-422, November.
    12. Bernard van den Berg & Ada Ferrer-i-Carbonell, 2007. "Monetary valuation of informal care: the well-being valuation method," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(11), pages 1227-1244.
    13. Alberto Zanni & Alastair Bailey & Sophia Davidova, 2008. "Analysis of the Vocational and Residential Preferences of a Rural Population: Application of an Experimental Technique to Rural Slovenia," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 89-114.
    14. Wendy A. Stock & John J. Siegfried, 2006. "The Labor Market for New Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics Ph.D.s," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 28(1), pages 147-163.
    15. Roe, Brian & Teisl, Mario F. & Levy, Alan & Russell, Matthew, 2001. "US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 917-925, September.
    16. Milena Pavlova & Wim Groot & Godefridus Merode, 2005. "An Application of Rating Conjoint Analysis to Study the Importance of Quality-, Access- and Price-attributes to Health Care Consumers," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 267-286, September.
    17. Harrison, R. Wes & Gillespie, Jeffrey & Fields, Deacue, 2005. "Analysis of Cardinal and Ordinal Assumptions in Conjoint Analysis," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(2), pages 238-252, October.
    18. Lüthi, Sonja & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2012. "The price of policy risk — Empirical insights from choice experiments with European photovoltaic project developers," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 1001-1011.
    19. Lynd Bacon & Peter Lenk, 2012. "Augmenting discrete-choice data to identify common preference scales for inter-subject analyses," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 453-474, December.
    20. Adelaja, Adesoji O., 1997. "New Challenges Facing Agricultural And Resource Economics Departments In The Twenty-First Century," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-13, October.

    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:oup:ajagec:v:86:y:2004:i:1:p:175-184. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.