Organic Row Crops In A Diversified Farm Portfolio
This paper estimates and compares the net returns of an organic row crop rotation to the returns of a conventional row crop rotation in the Midwest, and explores some of the sources of risk associated with organic row crop production. The study concludes modeling the optimal land use of a risk-averse producer assuming a producer is able to grow both organic and conventional row crops. The results indicate that the expected net returns of organic row crop production can be competitive with traditional corn and soybean production, however, the variation in returns can be nearly twice those of conventional production. The land use model indicates that organics is part of an optimal portfolio for producers with low levels of risk aversion. Land use changes to conventional corn and soybean production as risk aversion and farm size increase.
|Date of creation:||2000|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://waeaonline.org/|
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Penelope L. Diebel & Jeffery R. Williams & Richard V. Llewelyn, 1995. "An Economic Comparison of Conventional and Alternative Cropping Systems for a Representative Northeast Kansas Farm," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 17(3), pages 323-335.
- Luanne Lohr, 1998. "Implications of Organic Certification for Market Structure and Trade," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1125-1129.
- Knoblauch, Wayne A. & Brown, Rebecca & Braster, Martin, 1990. "Organic Field Crop Production A Review of the Economic Literature," Research Bulletins 183295, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
- Karen Klonsky & Laura Tourte, 1998. "Organic Agricultural Production in the United States: Debates and Directions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1119-1124.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:waeava:36478. 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)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.