IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uwfswp/201525.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Trait Specific Model of GM Crop Adoption by Minnesota and Wisconsin Corn Farmers

Author

Listed:
  • Useche, Pilar
  • Barham, Bradford
  • Foltz, Jeremy

Abstract

Advances in the genetic modification of agricultural seeds have allowed a range of new opportunities for manipulating seed traits according to production, market and environmental concerns. As seed varieties continue to become increasingly differentiated, preferences for specific seed traits may be expected to impart significant effects on farmer demand for new seeds. This paper proposes a model of technology adoption that integrates demand for traits of new technologies with the potential for heterogeneity based on farm and farmer characteristics. The model is applied to recent GM corn adoption data from Minnesota and Wisconsin farmers, and uses conditional logit and mixed multinomial logit econometric models to estimate the effects of traits and farm and farmer characteristics on adoption outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Useche, Pilar & Barham, Bradford & Foltz, Jeremy, 2006. "A Trait Specific Model of GM Crop Adoption by Minnesota and Wisconsin Corn Farmers," Working Papers 201525, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Food System Research Group.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:uwfswp:201525
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.201525
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/201525/files/WP2006-06.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.201525?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. Hausman, Jerry A & Wise, David A, 1978. "A Conditional Probit Model for Qualitative Choice: Discrete Decisions Recognizing Interdependence and Heterogeneous Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(2), pages 403-426, March.
    2. Alston, Julian M. & Hyde, Jeffrey & Marra, Michele C. & Mitchell, Paul D., 2003. "An Ex Ante Analysis of the Benefits from the Adoption of Corn Rootworm Resistant, Transgenic Corn Technology," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57828, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, January.
    4. repec:cdl:econwp:qt1j6814b3 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:cdl:econwp:qt3tb6j874 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    7. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    8. Bradford L. Barham, 1996. "Adoption of a Politicized Technology: bST and Wisconsin Dairy Farmers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(4), pages 1056-1063.
    9. Marra, Michele C. & Hubbell, Bryan J. & Carlson, Gerald A., 2001. "Information Quality, Technology Depreciation, And Bt Cotton Adoption In The Southeast," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(01), pages 1-18, July.
    10. Steven Berry & James Levinsohn & Ariel Pakes, 2004. "Differentiated Products Demand Systems from a Combination of Micro and Macro Data: The New Car Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(1), pages 68-105, February.
    11. Bhat, Chandra R., 1998. "Accommodating flexible substitution patterns in multi-dimensional choice modeling: formulation and application to travel mode and departure time choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 455-466, September.
    12. Bradford L. Barham & Jeremy D. Foltz & Douglas Jackson-Smith & Sunung Moon, 2004. "The Dynamics of Agricultural Biotechnology Adoption: Lessons from series rBST Use in Wisconsin, 1994–2001," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 61-72.
    13. repec:cdl:uctcwp:qt3tb6j874 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Dmitriy Stolyarov & Boyan Jovanovic, 2000. "Optimal Adoption of Complementary Technologies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 15-29, March.
    15. Zepeda, Lydia, 1990. "Predicting Bovine Somatotropin Use By California Dairy Farmers," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 15(01), pages 1-8, July.
    16. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Alexander, Corinne E. & Goodhue, Rachael E., 2002. "Dynamic Diffusion with Disadoption: The Case of Crop Biotechnology in the USA," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 31(01), pages 1-15, April.
    17. Duffy, Michael, 2001. "Who Benefits from Biotechnology?," Staff General Research Papers Archive 2084, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    18. repec:cdl:uctcwp:qt1j6814b3 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Steven T. Berry, 1994. "Estimating Discrete-Choice Models of Product Differentiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 242-262, Summer.
    20. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    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. Useche, Pilar & Barham, Bradford L. & Foltz, Jeremy D., 2005. "A Trait Specific Model of GM Crop Adoption among U.S. Corn Farmers in the Upper Midwest," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19202, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Pereira, Pedro & Ribeiro, Tiago, 2011. "The impact on broadband access to the Internet of the dual ownership of telephone and cable networks," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 283-293, March.
    3. Rachel Griffith & Lars Nesheim & Martin O'Connell, 2018. "Income effects and the welfare consequences of tax in differentiated product oligopoly," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), pages 305-341, March.
    4. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.
    5. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    6. Yoo, Do-il, 2012. "Individual and Social Learning in Bio-technology Adoption: The Case of GM Corn in the U.S," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124975, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Tinessa, Fiore & Marzano, Vittorio & Papola, Andrea, 2020. "Mixing distributions of tastes with a Combination of Nested Logit (CoNL) kernel: Formulation and performance analysis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1-23.
    8. Pietro Tebaldi & Alexander Torgovitsky & Hanbin Yang, 2023. "Nonparametric Estimates of Demand in the California Health Insurance Exchange," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(1), pages 107-146, January.
    9. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    10. Lapo Filistrucchi & Tobias J. Klein, 2013. "Price Competition in Two-Sided Markets with Heterogeneous Consumers and Network Effects," Working Papers 13-20, NET Institute.
    11. Pierre Dubois & Rachel Griffith & Martin O'Connell, 2020. "How Well Targeted Are Soda Taxes?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(11), pages 3661-3704, November.
    12. Steve Berry & Oliver B. Linton & Ariel Pakes, 2004. "Limit Theorems for Estimating the Parameters of Differentiated Product Demand Systems," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(3), pages 613-654.
    13. Steven T. Berry & Philip A. Haile, 2021. "Foundations of Demand Estimation," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2301, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    14. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens, 2007. "Discrete Choice Models With Multiple Unobserved Choice Characteristics," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(4), pages 1159-1192, November.
    15. Filistrucchi, L. & Gerardin, D. & van Damme, E.E.C. & Keunen, S. & Klein, T.J. & Michielsen, T.O. & Wileur, J., 2010. "Mergers in Two-Sided Markets - A Report to the NMa," Other publications TiSEM f901d1fe-8878-444e-a685-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    16. Otero, Karina V., 2008. "Evolución del Poder de Mercado en los Servicios de Intermediación Financiera en Argentina," MPRA Paper 86794, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Sep 2009.
    17. repec:cdl:uctcwp:qt5gd206wv is not listed on IDEAS
    18. repec:cdl:uctcwp:qt6sz198c2 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Robert Donnelly & Francisco J.R. Ruiz & David Blei & Susan Athey, 2021. "Counterfactual inference for consumer choice across many product categories," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 369-407, December.
    20. Sofia Berto Villas-Boas, 2007. "Vertical Relationships between Manufacturers and Retailers: Inference with Limited Data," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 74(2), pages 625-652.
    21. Abay, Kibrom A. & Berhane, Guush & Taffesse, Alemayehu Seyoum & Koru, Bethlehem & Abay, Kibrewossen, 2016. "Understanding farmers’ technology adoption decisions: Input complementarity and heterogeneity," ESSP working papers 82, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    22. Jerome Foncel & Marc Ivaldi & Jrisy Motis, 2008. "An Econometric Workbench for Comparing the Substantive and Dominance Tests in Horizontal Merger Analysis," Working Papers 0833, University of Crete, Department of Economics.

    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:uwfswp:201525. 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/dauwius.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.