IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/revage/v17y1995i3p337-350..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal Herbicide Strategies for Weed Control under Risk Aversion

Author

Listed:
  • David J. Pannell

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • David J. Pannell, 1995. "Optimal Herbicide Strategies for Weed Control under Risk Aversion," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 17(3), pages 337-350.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:revage:v:17:y:1995:i:3:p:337-350.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1349578
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jones, Randall E. & Cacho, Oscar J., 2000. "A Dynamic Optimisation Model of Weed Control," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123685, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Pannell, David J. & Stewart, Vanessa & Bennett, Anne & Monjardino, Marta & Schmidt, Carmel & Powles, Stephen B., 2004. "RIM: a bioeconomic model for integrated weed management of Lolium rigidum in Western Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 305-325, March.
    3. Feng, Shuaizhang & Han, Yujie & Qiu, Huanguang, 2021. "Does crop insurance reduce pesticide usage? Evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    4. Bontemps, Christophe & Bougherara, Douadia & Nauges, Céline, 2020. "Do Risk Preferences Really Matter? The Case of Pesticide Use in Agriculture," TSE Working Papers 20-1095, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    5. Dillon, Carl R., 1999. "Production Practice Alternatives For Income And Suitable Field Day Risk Management," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 31(2), pages 1-15, August.
    6. Yu, Chengzheng & Khanna, Madhu & Atallah, Shadi S. & Kar, Saurajyoti, 2022. "Economic Incentives for Robotic Weed Control in Row Crop Agriculture," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322149, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Wallinga, Jacco, 1998. "Analysis of the rational long-term herbicide use: Evidence for herbicide efficacy and critical weed kill rate as key factors," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 323-340, March.
    8. Xu, Qin & Fox, Glenn & McKenney, Dan & Parkin, Gary, 2019. "A theoretical economic model of the demand for irrigation water," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    9. repec:ags:aare05:137931 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Skevas, Theodoros & Stefanou, Spiro E. & Oude Lansink, Alfons, 2014. "Pesticide use, environmental spillovers and efficiency: A DEA risk-adjusted efficiency approach applied to Dutch arable farming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(2), pages 658-664.
    11. Jones, Randall E., 2005. "Sustainability and integrated weed management in Australian winter cropping systems: a bioeconomic analysis," 2005 Conference (49th), February 9-11, 2005, Coff's Harbour, Australia 137930, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    12. Bennett, Anne L. & Pannell, David J., 1998. "Economic evaluation of a weed-activated sprayer for herbicide application to patchy weed populations," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 42(4), pages 1-20.
    13. Gorddard, Russell J. & Pannell, David J. & Hertzler, Greg, 1996. "Economic evaluation of strategies for management of herbicide resistance," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 281-298, July.
    14. Pannell, David J. & Malcolm, Bill & Kingwell, Ross S., 2000. "Are we risking too much? Perspectives on risk in farm modelling," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 69-78, June.

    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:revage:v:17:y:1995:i:3:p:337-350.. 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: Oxford University Press or Christopher F. Baum (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.