IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ugeofs/16671.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Valuing Risk Tradeoffs And Voluntary Insecticide Reduction

Author

Listed:
  • Lohr, Luanne
  • Park, Timothy A.
  • Higley, Leon

Abstract

Farmer's willingness to voluntarily reduce insecticide use is not considered when regulatory approaches to environmental protection are proposed. Regulations that require behavior that would voluntarily be undertaken are excessive and economically inefficient. Using survey data from a contingent valuation scenario, we demonstrate the willingness of crop producers in four Midwestern states in the U.S. to trade yield losses for environmental risk reduction by eliminating an insecticide application. The mean acceptable yield loss for a sample of 1,138 producers in Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska and Ohio is $8.25 per acre. Acceptable yield loss increases with the rated importance of environmental goods (fish, birds, mammals, native plants and endangered species), with formal education and with farming experience. Willingness to pay increase with total expenditure on herbicides and insecticides up to $89 per acre, then decreases as total expenditure continues to rise. We approximate that crop farmers in the four states are willing to give up over $420 million in yield losses, or about 4 percent of total sales of corn and soybeans, to guarantee protection of eleven environmental goods from moderate insecticide risk. Uncertainty about risks, dominance of regulatory approaches and economic pressures undercut voluntary reductions in insecticide use.

Suggested Citation

  • Lohr, Luanne & Park, Timothy A. & Higley, Leon, 1996. "Valuing Risk Tradeoffs And Voluntary Insecticide Reduction," Faculty Series 16671, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ugeofs:16671
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.16671
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/16671/files/fs9610.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.16671?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Young Sook Eom, 1994. "Pesticide Residue Risk and Food Safety Valuation: A Random Utility Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(4), pages 760-771.
    2. Viscusi, W Kip & Evans, William N, 1990. "Utility Functions That Depend on Health Status: Estimates and Economic Implications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 353-374, June.
    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. Lohr, Luanne & Park, Timothy A. & Wetzstein, Michael E., 1998. "Voluntary Economic And Environmental Risk Tradeoffs In Crop Protection Decisions," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 27(1), pages 1-9, April.
    2. Ikuho Kochi & Bryan Hubbell & Randall Kramer, 2006. "An Empirical Bayes Approach to Combining and Comparing Estimates of the Value of a Statistical Life for Environmental Policy Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(3), pages 385-406, July.
    3. Jau-Rong Li & Dawn D. Thilmany, 1998. "Branded pork consumption in Taiwan: Analysis of market and product choice," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(2), pages 127-138.
    4. Rachel Kreier & Bhaswati Sengupta, 2015. "Income, Health, and the Value of Preserving Options," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 43(4), pages 431-448, December.
    5. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    6. Bo Xiong & John Beghin, 2017. "Disentangling Demand-Enhancing And Trade-Cost Effects Of Maximum Residue Regulations," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 6, pages 105-108, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Pablo Brañas‐Garza & Matteo M. Galizzi & Jeroen Nieboer, 2018. "Experimental And Self‐Reported Measures Of Risk Taking And Digit Ratio (2d:4d): Evidence From A Large, Systematic Study," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(3), pages 1131-1157, August.
    8. Monojit Chatterji & Colin Tilley, 2000. "Sickness, Absenteeism, "Presenteeism" and Sick Pay," Dundee Discussion Papers in Economics 117, Economic Studies, University of Dundee.
    9. Kevin Boyle & Sapna Kaul & Ali Hashemi & Xiaoshu Li, 2015. "Applicability of benefit transfers for evaluation of homeland security counterterrorism measures," Chapters, in: Carol Mansfield & V. K. Smith (ed.), Benefit–Cost Analyses for Security Policies, chapter 10, pages 225-253, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. de Bartolome, Charles A. M. & Vosti, Stephen A., 1995. "Choosing between public and private health-care: A case study of malaria treatment in Brazil," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 191-205, June.
    11. Antonovitz, Frances & Liu, Donald J., 1996. "A HEDONIC PRICE STUDY OF PESTICIDES IN FRUITS AND VEGETABLES; Proceedings of the Fifth Joint Conference on Agriculture, Food, and the Environment, June 17-18, 1996, Padova, Italy," Working Papers 14389, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.
    12. Aaron Sojourner, "undated". "Partial identification of willingness-to-pay using shape restrictions with an application to the value of a statistical life," Working Papers 0110, Human Resources and Labor Studies, University of Minnesota (Twin Cities Campus).
    13. Padmaja Ayyagari & Daifeng He, 2017. "The Role of Medical Expenditure Risk in Portfolio Allocation Decisions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(11), pages 1447-1458, November.
    14. J. François Outreville, 2013. "The Relationship Between Insurance and Economic Development: 85 Empirical Papers for a Review of the Literature," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 71-122, March.
    15. Xue, Hong & Mainville, Denise Y. & You, Wen & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr., 2009. "Nutrition Knowledge, Sensory Characteristics and Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Pasture-Fed Beef," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49277, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Hammitt, James K., 2022. "Prevention, Treatment, and Palliative Care: The Relative Value of Health Improvements under Alternative Evaluation Frameworks," TSE Working Papers 22-1339, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    17. Attema, Arthur E. & l’Haridon, Olivier & van de Kuilen, Gijs, 2019. "Measuring multivariate risk preferences in the health domain," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 15-24.
    18. Timothy J. Halliday, 2008. "Heterogeneity, state dependence and health," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 11(3), pages 499-516, November.
    19. Fadlon, Itzik & Nielsen, Torben Heien, 2019. "Household labor supply and the gains from social insurance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 18-28.
    20. Alberto Bennardo & Salvatore Piccolo, 2005. "Competitive occupational choices with endogenous health risks," Levine's Working Paper Archive 784828000000000199, David K. Levine.

    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:ugeofs:16671. 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/daugaus.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.