IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaa123/122440.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The adoption of innovative cropping systems under price and production risks: a dynamic model of crop rotation choice

Author

Listed:
  • Ridier, Aude
  • Chaib, Karim
  • Roussy, Caroline

Abstract

In the paper we investigate the role played by both production and market risks on farmer’s decision to adopt long rotations (over 2 years), considered as innovative cropping systems. We build a multiperiod dynamic farm model (run under GAMS) that arbitrates each year between traditional and innovative rotations. With discrete stochastic programming, the production risk is accounted as an intra-year risk; yearly farming operations are declined according to a decision tree where probabilities are assigned. Subjective yield and cost distributions linked to this decision tree are elicited among a sample of 13 farmers that are experiencing this innovation in South-western France. The price risk is randomly distributed with a given market trend. The crop acreage can be revised according to the market situation. The simulations show that substantive sunk costs are incentive to remain in the long rotation when the farmer is already engaged and when he is supported for this engagement. They also show that both a high risk aversion and a highly positive market trend tend to slow down the conversion towards innovative systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Ridier, Aude & Chaib, Karim & Roussy, Caroline, 2012. "The adoption of innovative cropping systems under price and production risks: a dynamic model of crop rotation choice," 123rd Seminar, February 23-24, 2012, Dublin, Ireland 122440, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa123:122440
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.122440
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/122440/files/Ridier.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.122440?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. Quang Nguyen & Colin Camerer & Tomomi Tanaka, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences Linking Experimental and Household Data from Vietnam," Post-Print halshs-00547090, HAL.
    2. Marra, Michele & Pannell, David J. & Abadi Ghadim, Amir, 2003. "The economics of risk, uncertainty and learning in the adoption of new agricultural technologies: where are we on the learning curve?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 75(2-3), pages 215-234.
    3. Isik, Murat & Khanna, Madhu & Winter-Nelson, Alex, 2001. "Sequential Investment In Site-Specific Crop Management Under Output Price Uncertainty," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Blazy, Jean-Marc & Tixier, Philippe & Thomas, Alban & Ozier-Lafontaine, Harry & Salmon, Frédéric & Wery, Jacques, 2010. "BANAD: A farm model for ex ante assessment of agro-ecological innovations and its application to banana farms in Guadeloupe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(4), pages 221-232, May.
    5. Graeme J. Doole & David J. Pannell, 2008. "Optimisation of a Large, Constrained Simulation Model using Compressed Annealing," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 188-206, February.
    6. Jean-Paul Chavas, 2008. "On the economics of agricultural production ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(4), pages 365-380, December.
    7. Abadi Ghadim, Amir K. & Pannell, David J., 1999. "A conceptual framework of adoption of an agricultural innovation," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 145-154, October.
    8. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    9. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer & Quang Nguyen, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences: Linking Experimental and Household Survey Data from Vietnam," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 557-571, March.
    10. Trebeck, David B. & Hardaker, J. Brian, 1972. "The Integrated Use Of Simulation And Stochastic Programming For Whole Farm Planning Under Risk," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 16(2), pages 1-12, August.
    11. Carpentier, Alain & Gohin, Alexandre & Letort, Elodie, 2011. "Accounting for agronomic rotations in crop production: A theoretical investigation and an empirical modeling framework," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103431, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Bocqueho, Geraldine & Jacquet, Florence & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Expected Utility or Prospect Theory Maximizers? Results from a Structural Model based on Field-experiment Data," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114257, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. David A. Hennessy, 2006. "On Monoculture and the Structure of Crop Rotations," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 900-914.
    14. Szvetlana Acs & Paul Berentsen & Ruud Huirne & Marcel van Asseldonk, 2009. "Effect of yield and price risk on conversion from conventional to organic farming ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(3), pages 393-411, July.
    15. Apland, Jeffrey & Hauer, Grant, 1993. "Discrete Stochastic Programming: Concepts, Examples And A Review Of Empirical Applications," Staff Papers 13793, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    16. David B. Trebeck & J. Brian Hardaker, 1972. "The Integrated Use Of Simulation And Stochastic Programming For Whole Farm Planning Under Risk," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 16(2), pages 115-126, August.
    17. Kenneth A. Baerenklau & Keith C. Knapp, 2007. "Dynamics of Agricultural Technology Adoption: Age Structure, Reversibility, and Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(1), pages 190-201.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ridier, Aude & Chaib, Karim & Roussy, Caroline, 2016. "A Dynamic Stochastic Programming model of crop rotation choice to test the adoption of long rotation under price and production risks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 252(1), pages 270-279.
    2. Canales, Elizabeth & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery & Peterson, Jeffrey, 2015. "Estimating farmers’ risk attitudes and risk premiums for the adoption of conservation practices under different contractual arrangements: A stated choice experiment," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205640, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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. Ridier, Aude & Chaib, Karim & Roussy, Caroline, 2016. "A Dynamic Stochastic Programming model of crop rotation choice to test the adoption of long rotation under price and production risks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 252(1), pages 270-279.
    2. Wu, Haixia & Ge, Yan & Li, Jianping, 2023. "Uncertainty, time preference and households’ adoption of rooftop photovoltaic technology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    3. Aniseh S. Bro, 2020. "Climate Change Adaptation, Food Security, and Attitudes toward Risk among Smallholder Coffee Farmers in Nicaragua," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-17, August.
    4. Ihli, Hanna Julia & Chiputwa, Brian & Musshoff, Oliver, 2016. "Do Changing Probabilities or Payoffs in Lottery-Choice Experiments Affect Risk Preference Outcomes? Evidence from Rural Uganda," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(2), May.
    5. Wu, Haixia & Li, Jianping & Ge, Yan, 2022. "Ambiguity preference, social learning and adoption of soil testing and formula fertilization technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    6. Herrmann, Tabea & Hübler, Olaf & Menkhoff, Lukas & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2016. "Allais for the poor," Kiel Working Papers 2036, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    7. 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.
    8. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Lejarraga, Tomás, 2021. "Elicitation of risk preferences through satisficing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    9. Daniel Woods & Mustafa Abdallah & Saurabh Bagchi & Shreyas Sundaram & Timothy Cason, 2022. "Network defense and behavioral biases: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 254-286, February.
    10. Bocqueho, Geraldine & Jacquet, Florence & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Expected Utility or Prospect Theory Maximizers? Results from a Structural Model based on Field-experiment Data," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114257, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Jindrich Matousek & Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova, 2022. "Individual discount rates: a meta-analysis of experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 318-358, February.
    12. 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.
    13. Christoph Huber & Christian König-Kersting & Matteo M. Marini, 2022. "Experimenting with Financial Professionals," Working Papers 2022-07, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck, revised Jun 2024.
    14. Schleich, Joachim & Faure, Corinne & Meissner, Thomas, 2021. "Adoption of retrofit measures among homeowners in EU countries: The effects of access to capital and debt aversion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    15. Vischer, Thomas & Dohmen, Thomas & Falk, Armin & Huffman, David & Schupp, Jürgen & Sunde, Uwe & Wagner, Gert G., 2013. "Validating an Ultra-Short Survey Measure of Patience," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 120(2), pages 142-145.
    16. Jonathan Chapman & Erik Snowberg & Stephanie Wang & Colin Camerer, 2018. "Loss Attitudes in the U.S. Population: Evidence from Dynamically Optimized Sequential Experimentation (DOSE)," NBER Working Papers 25072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Schleich, Joachim & Gassmann, Xavier & Faure, Corinne & Meissner, Thomas, 2016. "Making the implicit explicit: A look inside the implicit discount rate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 321-331.
    18. Tristan Le Cotty & Elodie Maître d’Hôtel & Raphael Soubeyran & Julie Subervie, 2018. "Linking Risk Aversion, Time Preference and Fertiliser Use in Burkina Faso," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(11), pages 1991-2006, November.
    19. Sanjaya, Muhammad Ryan, 2013. "On the source of risk aversion in Indonesia using micro data 2007," Economics Discussion Papers 2013-33, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    20. Keil, Alwin & Nielsen, Thea, 2012. "Accounting for farmers’ risk preferences in investigating land allocation decisions in marginal environments: a test of various elicitation measures in an application from Vietnam," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126054, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Risk and Uncertainty;

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • D0 - Microeconomics - - General
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation

    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:eaa123:122440. 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/eaaeeea.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.