IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea16/235155.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Effects of Residue Tolerance on Pesticide Use, Hop Marketing and Social Welfare

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Ruojin

Abstract

Pesticide use can mitigate production risks from pest and disease infestations. However, intensive pesticide use may result in large amount of pesticide residues, causing hop-quality damages and raising food safety issues. Pesticide use also leads to sizable negative ecological and environmental externalities. In respond to food safety and other socio-economic issues, policy makers, such as national governments and international organizations, pursue low pesticide residues by implementing tolerance which permits only a maximum concentration of agrichemical residues. This paper examines the social-economic impacts of the residue tolerance. To this end, a four-stage game theoretic model is outlined to characterize the stylized attributes of both domestic hop production and marketing. The model highlights the strategic interactions between hop growers, hop merchant and the government. Multiple market equilibria are characterized. The analysis contributes to a better understanding of social welfare which accommodates the environmental externalities of pesticide use. Simulations are conducted based on hop production information in the Pacific Northwest of the United States.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Ruojin, 2016. "The Effects of Residue Tolerance on Pesticide Use, Hop Marketing and Social Welfare," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235155, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea16:235155
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/235155/files/AAEA2016.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Asche, Frank & Tveteras, Ragnar, 1999. "Modeling Production Risk With A Two-Step Procedure," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 24(2), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Jean-Marc Bourgeon & Robert G. Chambers, 2008. "Implementable Ramsey-Boiteux Pricing in Agricultural and Environmental Policy," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(2), pages 499-508.
    3. Buzby, Jean C. & Ready, Richard C. & Skees, Jerry R., 1995. "Contingent Valuation in Food Policy Analysis: A Case Study of a Pesticide-Residue Risk Reduction," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(02), pages 613-625, December.
    4. Håkan Eggert & Ragnar Tveteras, 2004. "Stochastic Production and Heterogeneous Risk Preferences: Commercial Fishers' Gear Choices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 199-212.
    5. Nancy E. Bockstael, 1984. "The Welfare Implications of Minimum Quality Standards," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(4), pages 466-471.
    6. Wasantha Athukorala & Clevo Wilson & Tim Robinson, 2012. "Determinants of Health Costs due to Farmers’ Exposure to Pesticides: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 158-174, February.
    7. Jean-Paul Chavas & Matthew T. Holt, 1990. "Acreage Decisions Under Risk: The Case of Corn and Soybeans," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(3), pages 529-538.
    8. Abedullah & Shahzad Kouser & Matin Qaim, 2015. "Bt Cotton, Pesticide Use and Environmental Efficiency in Pakistan," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(1), pages 66-86, February.
    9. Bruce A. Babcock & David A. Hennessy, 1996. "Input Demand under Yield and Revenue Insurance," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(2), pages 416-427.
    10. Binswanger, Hans P, 1981. "Attitudes toward Risk: Theoretical Implications of an Experiment in Rural India," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 867-890, December.
    11. Chavas, Jean-Paul & Holt, Matthew T, 1996. "Economic Behavior under Uncertainty: A Joint Analysis of Risk Preferences and Technology," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(2), pages 329-335, May.
    12. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Beach, E. Douglas & Huang, Wen-Yuan, 1994. "The Adoption of IPM Techniques By Vegetable Growers in Florida, Michigan and Texas," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(01), pages 158-172, July.
    13. Baker, Gregory A. & Crosbie, Peter J., 1993. "Measuring Food Safety Preferences: Identifying Consumer Segments," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 18(2), pages 1-11, December.
    14. repec:ags:inrass:153336 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Beach, E. Douglas & Huang, Wen-Yuan, 1994. "The Adoption Of Ipm Techniques By Vegetable Growers In Florida, Michigan And Texas," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 1-15, July.
    16. Kerri Brick & Martine Visser & Justine Burns, 2012. "Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence from South African Fishing Communities," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 133-152.
    17. John M. Antle, 2010. "Do Economic Variables Follow Scale or Location-Scale Distributions?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(1), pages 196-204.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agribusiness; Agricultural and Food Policy; Crop Production/Industries;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aaea16:235155. 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: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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 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.

    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.