IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Learning by Doing, Risk Aversion and Use of Risk Management Strategies


  • Uematsu, Hiroki
  • Ashok, Mishra K.


Using a national survey, double hurdle models are estimated to examine the impact of farmers’ risk attitude on use of production and marketing contracts. Risk averse farmers are less likely to use contracts but risk attitude does not have any significant impact on the intensity at which contracts are adopted.

Suggested Citation

  • Uematsu, Hiroki & Ashok, Mishra K., 2011. "Learning by Doing, Risk Aversion and Use of Risk Management Strategies," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103851, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea11:103851

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. William S. Breffle & Edward R. Morey & Tymon S. Lodder, 1998. "Using Contingent Valuation to Estimate a Neighbourhood's Willingness to Pay to Preserve Undeveloped Urban Land," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 35(4), pages 715-727, April.
    2. Torres, Arturo Balderas & Marchant, Rob & Lovett, Jon C. & Smart, James C.R. & Tipper, Richard, 2010. "Analysis of the carbon sequestration costs of afforestation and reforestation agroforestry practices and the use of cost curves to evaluate their potential for implementation of climate change mitigat," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 469-477, January.
    3. Russell, Clifford S., 2001. "Applying Economics to the Environment," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195126846, June.
    4. Peter J. Parks & Ian W. Hardie, 1995. "Least-Cost Forest Carbon Reserves: Cost-Effective Subsidies to Convert Marginal Agricultural Land to Forests," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 71(1), pages 122-136.
    5. Barrio, Melina & Loureiro, Maria L., 2010. "A meta-analysis of contingent valuation forest studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1023-1030, March.
    6. Acharya, Gayatri & Bennett, Lynne Lewis, 2001. "Valuing Open Space and Land-Use Patterns in Urban Watersheds," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2-3), pages 221-237, March-May.
    7. Lee, Choong-Ki & W. Mjelde, James, 2007. "Valuation of ecotourism resources using a contingent valuation method: The case of the Korean DMZ," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 511-520, August.
    8. Adams, Cristina & Seroa da Motta, Ronaldo & Ortiz, Ramón Arigoni & Reid, John & Ebersbach Aznar, Cristina & de Almeida Sinisgalli, Paulo Antonio, 2008. "The use of contingent valuation for evaluating protected areas in the developing world: Economic valuation of Morro do Diabo State Park, Atlantic Rainforest, São Paulo State (Brazil)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 359-370, June.
    9. Seong-Hoon Cho & Dayton Lambert & Seung Kim & Roland Roberts & William Park, 2011. "Relationship between value of open space and distance from housing locations within a community," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 393-414, December.
    10. Rosen, Sherwin, 1974. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 34-55, Jan.-Feb..
    11. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Kim, Seung Gyu & Roberts, Roland K. & Jung, Suhyun, 2009. "Amenity values of spatial configurations of forest landscapes over space and time in the Southern Appalachian Highlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2646-2657, August.
    12. Robert N. Stavins, 1999. "The Costs of Carbon Sequestration: A Revealed-Preference Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 994-1009, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Risk attitude; Double hurdle model; production contracts; marketing contracts; Agribusiness; Crop Production/Industries; Farm Management; Livestock Production/Industries; Marketing; Risk and Uncertainty; Q10; Q13; D81;

    JEL classification:

    • Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:aaea11:103851. 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: .

    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 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.

    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.