Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:10:44.624Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Real Options Analysis of Automatic Milking Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Phoebe D. Engel  and
Jeffrey Hyde
Phoebe D. Engel
Affiliation:
Bunge Global Markets Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, The Pennsylvania State University
Jeffrey Hyde
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, The Pennsylvania State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Automatic, or robotic, milking systems have the potential to significantly change the way milk is produced on U.S. dairy farms. However, there is a high degree of uncertainty associated with adoption of this new technology. A real options approach is used to analyze the decision to replace an operational milking system with an automatic milking system. The most important source of uncertainty is shown to be the length of the technology's useful life. Under our assumptions, the automatic system is always an optimal investment if it is certain that it will last longer than the operational system being replaced.

Keywords

automatic milking systemcapital budgetingnet present valuereal optionsrobotic milking system
Type
Articles
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , October 2003 , pp. 282 - 294
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Armstrong, D. V., Daugherty, L. S., Galton, D. M., and Knoblauch, W. A. (1992). “Analysis of Capital Investment in Robotic Milking Systems for U.S. Dairy Farms.” Paper presented at the International Milking Center Design Conference, Lelystad, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Arts, T. (2001). Dairy farmer, Thamesford, Ontario, Canada. Personal communication.Google Scholar
Balmann, A., and Mu§hoff, O. (2002). “Is the ‘Standard Real Options Approach’ Appropriate for Investment Decisions in Hog Production?” Selected paper presented at the 2002 annual meetings of the American Agricultural Economics Association, Long Beach, CA.Google Scholar
Barry, P. J., Ellinger, P. N., Hopkin, J. A., and Baker, C. B. (2000). Financial Management in Agriculture, 6th edition. Danville, IL: Interstate Publishers. Google Scholar
Brach, M. A. (2003). Real Options in Practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Canning, P., and Tsigas, M. (2000). “Current Tax Policy vs. Flat Tax: Effects on U.S. Agriculture.” Agricultural Outlook. U.S. Department of Agriculture/Economic Research Service, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Cooper, K., and Parsons, D. J. (1999). “An Economic Analysis of Automatic Milking Using a Simulation Model.” Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 73, 311–321.Google Scholar
Dersam, P., and Price, C. (2003). “Inspection Groups Looking at Robotics’ PMO Compliance.” Hoard's Dairyman 148(3), 124.Google Scholar
Dijkhuizen, A., Huirne, R., Harsh, S., and Gardner, R. (1997). “Economics of Robot Application.” Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 17, 111–121.Google Scholar
Dixit, A. K. (1992). “Investment and Hysteresis.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 6(1), 107–132.Google Scholar
Dixit, A. K., and Pindyck, R. S. (1994). Investment Under Uncertainty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Engel, P. D. (2002). “An Ex Ante Real Options Analysis of Automatic Milking Systems in Pennsylvania and the Northeast.” M.S. thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, The Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
Erdman, R. A., and Varner, M. (1995). “Fixed Yield Responses to Increased Milking Frequency.” Journal of Dairy Science 78, 1199–1203.Google Scholar
Geleynse, B. (2001-2002). Sales representative, Boumatic, Inc., Madison, WI. Various personal communications.Google Scholar
Grant, D. (2002). Dairy farmer, Nova Scotia, Canada. Personal communication.Google Scholar
Hyde, J. (2002). “Robotic Milking in Pennsylvania.” Weekly News, Notes, and Numbers. Online newsletter. Available at http://farmmanagement.aers.psu.edu/pubs/WeeklyFeature/robots071502.htm. [Last accessed November 2002.]Google Scholar
Hyde, J., and Dunn, J. W. (2002). “Efficiency and Profitability of Pennsylvania Dairy Farms: 1995-1999.” Pub. No. UA369, Cooperative Extension Service, Penn State University.Google Scholar
Hyde, J., and Engel, P. D. (2002). “Investing in a Robotic Milking System: A Monte Carlo Simulation Analysis.” Journal of Dairy Science 85, 2207–2214.Google Scholar
Isik, M. (2001). “Technology Adoption Decisions Under Uncertainty: Impacts of Alternative Return Assumptions on Timing of Adoption.” Selected paper presented at the 2001 annual meetings of the AAEA, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Isik, M., Coble, K. H., Hudson, D., and House, L. O. (2002). “A Model of Entry-Exit Decisions and Capacity Choice Under Demand Uncertainty.” Selected paper presented at the 2002 annual meetings of the American Agricultural Economics Association, Long Beach, CA.Google Scholar
Kamps, A. (2002). Sales representative, Lely Industries, Harrisburg, PA. Personal communication.Google Scholar
Kurklova, L., Kling, C., and Zhao, J. (2001). “Real Options vs. Risk Aversion in the Adoption of Conservation Tillage: The Revealed Premium for Adopting Conservation Tillage.” Selected paper presented at the 2001 annual meetings of the American Agricultural Economics Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Lander, D. M., and Pinches, G. E. (1998). “Challenges to the Practical Implementation of Modeling and Valuing Real Options.” Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 38, 537–567.Google Scholar
Lavoie, B. F., and Sheldon, I. M. (2000). “The Source of Comparative Advantage in the Biotechnology Industry: A Real Options Approach.” Agribusiness: An International Journal 16(1), 56–67.Google Scholar
Lind, O., Ipema, A. H., de Koning, C., Mottram, T. T., and Hermann, H. J. (2000). “Automatic Milking: Reality, Challenges, and Opportunities.” In Hogeveen, H. and Meijering, A. (eds.), Conference Proceedings of the International Symposium on Robotic Milking. Lelystad, The Netherlands: Wageningen Pers.Google Scholar
McDonald, R., and Siegel, D. (1986). “The Value of Waiting to Invest.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 101(4), 707–728.Google Scholar
McFarland, D. (2001). Extension agricultural engineer, Penn State University. Personal communication.Google Scholar
Parsons, D. J. (1988). “An Initial Economic Assessment of Fully Automatic Milking of Dairy Cows.” Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 40, 199–214.Google Scholar
Purvis, A., Boggess, W. G., Moss, C. B., and Holt, J. (1995). “Technology Adoption Decisions Under Irreversibility and Uncertainty: An Ex Ante Approach.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 77, 541–551.Google Scholar
Reinemann, D.J. (2002). “Evolution of Automated Milking in the USA.” In Conference Proceedings of the First North American Conference on Robotic Milking. Toronto, Canada: Wageningen Pers.Google Scholar
Rodenburg, J. (2001-2002). Program leader, Dairy Production Systems, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture. Various personal communications.Google Scholar
Rogers, D. (2001). “Milking Parlor as a Profit Center.” Paper presented at the Natural Resource, Agricultural, and Engineering Service Conference titled “Milking Systems and Parlors: Planning and Managing for Quality Milk and Profitability,” Camp Hill, PA.Google Scholar
Sporleder, T. L., and Bailey, M. D. (2001). “Using Real Options to Evaluate Producer Investment in New Generation Cooperatives.” Selected paper presented at the 2001 annual meetings of the American Agricultural Economics Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Stup, R. (2001). Human resource management specialist, Dairy Alliance, Penn State University. Personal communication.Google Scholar
Trigeorgis, L. (1996). Real Options. Cambridge, MA. The ΜIT Press.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. (2001). “Milk Costs and Returns for the Northeast, 1980-2000.” USDA/ERS, Washington, DC. Online. Available at http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/costsandreturns/data/history/milk/h-nemilk.xls. [Last accessed March 2002.]Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. (2001a). “Farm Labor” web page. USDA/NASS, Washington, DC. Online at http://usda.mannlib.comell.edu/reports/nassr/other/pfl-bb/. [Last accessed March 2002.]Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. (2001b). “Milk Price” web page. USDA/NASS, Washington, DC. Online at http://usda.mannlib.comell.edu/reports/nassr/price/pap-bb/. [Last accessed March 2002.]Google Scholar
van der Vorst, Y., and de Koning, K. (2002). “Automatic Milking Systems and Milk Quality in Three European Countries.” In Conference Proceedings of the First North American Conference on Robotic Milking. Toronto, Canada: Wageningen Pers.Google Scholar
van der Vorst, Y., and Hogeveen, H. (2000). “Automatic Milking Systems and Milk Quality in the Netherlands.” In Hogeveen, H. and Meijering, A. (eds.), Conference Proceedings of the International Symposium on Robotic Milking. Lelystad, The Netherlands: Wageningen Pers.Google Scholar