IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ifma24/398728.html

Resilience, Producer Sentiment, and Related Farm Characteristics

Author

Listed:
  • Lippsmeyer, Margaret
  • Langemeier, Michael
  • Mintert, James
  • Thompson, Nathanael

Abstract

At the 2024 Purdue Top Farmer Conference, a survey exploring farm resilience, producer sentiment, and growth expectations was conducted, yielding insights into the perspectives of America’s leading farmers. This study compares survey responses from 52 agricultural producers from the Top Farmer Conference, against national surveys using identical survey instruments. Analysis of the survey data is performed using t-tests and correlation coefficients to test associations between resilience, growth expectations, and sentiment among attendees compared to national respondents. Top Farmer Conference participants displayed a more optimistic outlook on the agricultural economy and higher expectations for farm growth. Attendees display similar resilience levels to the national averages, despite lower diversification, suggesting these producers choose to use specialization as an intentional business strategy. Despite lacking direct measures of risk preference and managerial abilities due to the survey's condensed nature, predictive classification models estimate these attributes, suggesting superior managerial skills among conference attendees, but not significantly higher levels of risk aversion. This research highlights the interaction between resilience, producer sentiment, and farm growth expectations for leading agricultural producers. Estimates of managerial acumen and risk preference provide further depth to comparisons of Purdue Top Farmer Conference attendees to the average U.S. producer.

Suggested Citation

  • Lippsmeyer, Margaret & Langemeier, Michael & Mintert, James & Thompson, Nathanael, 2024. "Resilience, Producer Sentiment, and Related Farm Characteristics," 24th Congress, Saskatoon, Canada, 2024 398728, International Farm Management Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ifma24:398728
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.398728
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/398728/files/Lippsmeyer%20et%20al.%20--%20Resilience%2C%20producer%20sentiment%2C%20and%20related%20farm%20characteristics.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.398728?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Olsson, Rolf, 1988. "Management for Success in Modern Agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 15(2/3), pages 239-259.
    2. MacDonald, James M. & Hoppe, Robert A., . "Examining Consolidation in U.S. Agriculture," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 0(02).
    3. Davis, Christopher & Dimitri, Carolyn & Nehring, Richard & Collins, LaPorchia & Haley, Mildred & Ha, Kim & Gillespie, Jeffrey, . "U.S. Hog Production: Rising Output and Changing Trends in Productivity Growth," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 2022(Economic ).
    4. Davis, Christopher & Dimitri, Carolyn & Nehring, Richard & Collins, LaPorchia & Haley, Mildred & Ha, Kim & Gillespie, Jeffrey, 2022. "U.S. Hog Production: Rising Output and Changing Trends in Productivity Growth," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, vol. 2022(Economic ), August.
    5. Rejesus, Roderick M. & Knight, Thomas O. & Jaramillo, Mauricio & Coble, Keith H. & Patrick, George F. & Baquet, Alan E., 2008. "Preference for Risk Management Information Sources: Implications for Extension and Outreach Programming," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 37(01), pages 1-11, April.
    6. Sulewski, Piotr & Kłoczko-Gajewska, Anna, 2014. "Farmers’ risk perception, risk aversion and strategies to cope with production risk: an empirical study from Poland," Studies in Agricultural Economics, Research Institute for Agricultural Economics, vol. 116(3), pages 1-8, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bolotova Yuliya V., 2025. "Collusion and Price Behavior in the U.S. Pork Industry," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 23(1), pages 35-49.
    2. Lippsmeyer, Margaret & Langemeier, Michael & Mintert, James & Thompson, Nathanael, 2022. "Resilience to Risk in Modern Agriculture: Implications of Farm Management," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 40(2).
    3. Li Zhao & Shumin Liu & Haiying Gu & David Ahlstrom, 2023. "Risk Amplification, Risk Preference and Acceptance of Transgenic Technology," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-22, September.
    4. Md. Shakhawat Hossain, 2025. "Assessing smallholder farmers’ flood risk behavior and their willingness to pay for crop insurance as a risk coping strategy in northern Bangladesh," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 121(4), pages 4191-4217, March.
    5. Buddhika Patalee & Glynn T. Tonsor, 2021. "Weather effects on U.S. cow‐calf production: A long‐term panel analysis," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(4), pages 838-857, October.
    6. Claya, Pablo Mac & Accursia, Federico M. & Harmath, Pedro, 2022. "Surviving as an Argentine Farmer: Factors that Influence Risk Management Strategies," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 13(04), December.
    7. Awais Jabbar & Qun Wu & Jianchao Peng & Ali Sher & Asma Imran & Kunpeng Wang, 2020. "Mitigating Catastrophic Risks and Food Security Threats: Effects of Land Ownership in Southern Punjab, Pakistan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-18, December.
    8. Rite, Arvind; Abnave, Vikas, 2024. "Rainfall Variability, Risk, and Resilience: A Comparative Study of Insured vs. Non-Insured Farmers in Maharashtra, India," Research on World Agricultural Economy, Nan Yang Academy of Sciences Pte Ltd (NASS), vol. 5(4), September.
    9. repec:ags:aes324:345977 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Fahad, Shah & Wang, Jing & Hu, Guangyin & Wang, Hui & Yang, Xiaoying & Shah, Ashfaq Ahmad & Huong, Nguyen Thi Lan & Bilal, Arshad, 2018. "Empirical analysis of factors influencing farmers crop insurance decisions in Pakistan: Evidence from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 459-467.
    11. Zahra Ranjbar & Mohammad Chizari & Hasan Sadighi & Homayon Farhadian & Philippe Lebailly & Thomas Dogot & Jorge Armando Ortegón Rojas & Yenny Katherine Parra-Acosta & Hossein Azadi, 2021. "Risk Factors in Various Climates of Wheat Production in Western Iran: Experts’ Opinions," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-17, December.
    12. Yuan, Shiwei & Li, Xin & Du, Erhu, 2021. "Effects of farmers’ behavioral characteristics on crop choices and responses to water management policies," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    13. Sudip Adhikari & Aditya R. Khanal, 2021. "Economic Sustainability and Multiple Risk Management Strategies: Examining Interlinked Decisions of Small American Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.
    14. Harrison, Jennifer L. & O'Brian, Dennis T., 1999. "Multiple Objectives On Nswdairy Farms:Assigned Importance And Related Satisfaction," 1999 Conference (43th), January 20-22, 1999, Christchurch, New Zealand 123813, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    15. Zhongqiong Qu & Yongxin Wei & Xun Li, 2021. "Risk Perception of Rural Land Supply Reform in China: From the Perspective of Stakeholders," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-25, July.
    16. Atta, Cosmos & Micheels, Eric, 2022. "A Best-Worst Scaling Approach To Understand The Risk Management Preferences Of Saskatchewan Grain And Oilseed Farmers," 23rd Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2022 345977, International Farm Management Association.
    17. Josep M. Argilés, 1998. "Accounting information and the prediction of farm viability," Economics Working Papers 277, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    18. Muhammad Amjed Iqbal & Azhar Abbas & Syed Asif Ali Naqvi & Muhammad Rizwan & Abdus Samie & Umar Ijaz Ahmed, 2020. "Drivers of Farm Households’ Perceived Risk Sources and Factors Affecting Uptake of Mitigation Strategies in Punjab Pakistan: Implications for Sustainable Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-17, November.
    19. Juan Carlos Pérez-Mesa & Francisco Javier Pérez-Mesa & Juan José Tapia-León & Diego Luis Valera, 2022. "Scheduling vegetable sales to supermarkets in Europe: The tomato case," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(11), pages 403-412.
    20. Martin, Sandra & Lee, Bill, 1991. "Risk in Farming," 8th Congress, New Zealand, 4-9 February 1991 346158, International Farm Management Association.
    21. Yiming Zhang & Rui Yang & Kai Zhao & Xiangzhi Kong, 2023. "Fertilizer Application in Contract Farming: A Risk Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    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:ifma24:398728. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifmaaea.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.