Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T04:48:59.075Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hedging a Government Entitlement: The Case of Countercyclical Payments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

John D. Anderson ,
Keith H. Coble  and
J. Corey Miller
John D. Anderson
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS
Keith H. Coble
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS
J. Corey Miller
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This research evaluates whether the introduction of countercyclical payments creates an incentive for program crop producers to hedge the expected government payment using futures and/or options. Results indicate that some level of countercyclical payment hedging is optimal for risk-averse decision makers. However, optimal hedge ratios depend on planting time expectations of marketing year average price as well as on what crop, if any, has been planted on countercyclical payment base acres. These results suggest that the ability to hedge may make these payments more decoupled but also illustrate the distortion of producer behavior induced by farm programs.

Keywords

countercyclical paymentexpected utilityhedgingpolicyriskQ12Q13Q18
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 39 , Issue 3 , December 2007 , pp. 507 - 522
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2007

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

Adams, B.D., Betts, S., and Brorsen, B.W.. “Effects of Reduced Government Deficiency Payments on Post-Harvest Wheat Marketing Strategies.” Journal of Futures Markets 20(2000):243-63.3.0.CO;2-F>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, C.G. “Maximizing Returns under the New Farm Program.” Proceedings of the 2003 Beltwide Cotton Conference, 2003, pp. 308-14.Google Scholar
Coble, K., and Anderson, J.. “Marketing Year Average Prices and the Counter-Cyclical Payment.” Agricultural Economic and Policy Perspectives 1,6(2002):1–3.Google Scholar
Coble, K.H., Zuniga, M., and Heifner, R.. “Evaluation of the Interaction of Risk Management Tools for Cotton and Soybeans.” Agricultural Systems 75(2003):323-40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, K.J., and Glauber, G.W.. “Will Policy Changes Usher in a New Era of Increased Agricultural Market Variability?” Choices 13,2(1998):26–29.Google Scholar
Gardner, B.L. “Risk Created by Policy in Agriculture.” A Comprehensive Assessment of the Role of Risk in U.S. Agriculture, Just, R.E. and Pope, R.D., eds. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002.Google Scholar
Gardner, B.L. “Commodity Options for Agriculture.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 59(1977):986-92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glauber, J.W., and Miranda, M.J.. “Price Stabilization, Revenue Stabilization, and the Natural Hedge.” Unpublished manuscript, Ohio State University, 1996.Google Scholar
Hanson, S.D., Myers, R.J., and Hilker, J.H.. “Hedging with Futures and Options under a Truncated Cash Price Distribution.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 31(1999):449-59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardaker, J.B., Huirne, R.B.M., and Anderson, J.R.. Coping with Risk in Agriculture. New York: CAB International, 1997.Google Scholar
Mississippi State University, Delta 2003 Planning Budgets. Mississippi State, MS: Department of Agricultural Economics, Mississippi State University, Budget Report 2002-010, 2002.Google Scholar
Phoon, K., Quek, S.T., and Huang, H.. “Simulation of Non-Gaussian Processes Using Fractile Correlation.” Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics 19(2004):287-92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, S.H. “Protect the Counter-Cyclical Payment.” Delta Farm Press, March 14 2003, pp. 22–23.Google Scholar
Turvey, C.G., and Baker, T.G.. “A Farm-Level Financial Analysis of Farmers' Use of Futures and Options under Alternative Farm Programs.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 72(1990):946-57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture-Farm Service Agency. “Direct and Counter-Cyclical Payment Program Fact Sheet.” USDA-FSA Fact Sheet, Electronic Edition. Internet site: www.fsa.usda.gov/pas/publications/facts/html/dcp03.htm (Accessed January 24, 2006).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture-Farm Service Agency. “Feed Grains: Summary of 2002-2007 Program.” USDA-FSA Fact Sheet, Electronic Edition. Internet site: www.fsa.usda.gov/pas/publications/facts/html/feedgrains03.htm (Accessed January 24, 2006).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture-Farm Service Agency. “Non-Recourse Marketing Assistance Loan and Loan Deficiency Payment Program.” USDA-FSA Fact Sheet, Electronic Edition. Internet site: www.fsa.usda.gov/pas/publications/facts/html/nonrec03.htm (Accessed January 24, 2006).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture-Farm Service Agency. “Payment Eligibility and Limitations.” USDA-FSA Fact Sheet, Electronic Edition. Internet site: www.fsa.usda.gov/pas/publications/facts/html/payelig03.htm (Accessed January 24, 2006).Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service. Agricultural Prices (various issues). Washington, DC: USDA-NASS, 1975-2002.Google Scholar