Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T19:08:02.912Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using Insurance to Enhance Nitrogen Fertilizer Application Timing to Reduce Nitrogen Losses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Wen-Yuan Huang
Wen-Yuan Huang*
Affiliation:
USDA, Economic Research Service, 1800 M Street NW, Washington D.C. 20036
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Nitrogen applied before planting is more vulnerable to loss to the environment than nitrogen applied during the growing season, but the growing season application can increase the risk of lower yields caused by adverse weather that prohibits farmers to complete N application. An expected utility framework is used to illustrate the potential economic benefit of insurance for a farmer to reduce this risk cost. An expected-value variance analysis is used to illustrate the potential benefit of insurance to Iowa corn growers who apply N fertilizer only during the growing season.

Keywords

insurancenitrogen fertilizerapplication timings
Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , April 2002 , pp. 131 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2002

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

Agricultural Conservation Information Center. Innovation News, No. 1, 1998 http://www/agconserv.com.Google Scholar
Ahsan, S. M., Ali, A. G., and Kurian, N. J.. “Toward a Theory of Agricultural Insurance.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 64 (1992):520–529.Google Scholar
Anderson, J.R., Dillon, J.L., and Hardaker, B.. Agricultural Decision Analysis. Ames IA: The Iowa State University Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Babcock, B.A. “The Effects of Uncertainty on Optimal Nitrogen Applications.” Review of Agricultural Economics 14 (1992):271–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babcock, B.A. and Hennessy, D.A.. “Input Demand under Yield and Revenue Insurance.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 78 (1996): 428–438.Google Scholar
Beattie, B.R. and Taylor, C.R.. The Economics of Production. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1985.Google Scholar
Boggess, W.G. and Ritchie, J.T.. “Economic and Risk Analysis of Irrigation Decisions in Humid Regions.” Journal of Production Agriculture 1(1988):45–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bundy, L. A professor in Department of Soil Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison. E-mail March 9, 1998.Google Scholar
Cerrato, M.E. and Blackmer, A. M.. “Comparison of Models for Describing Corn Yield Response to Nitrogen Fertilizer.” Agronomy Journal 82(1990): 138–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clean Water Action Plan (1998). The National Center for Environmental Publications and Information, Cincinnati, OH, 1998.Google Scholar
Cruse, R. a professor in Department of Agronomy and Soil Science, Iowa State University, personal communication. Personal communication, 1998.Google Scholar
Davidson, R. and Mackinnon, J. “Several tests for model specification in the presence of alternative hypotheses.” Econometrica 49(1981):781–794.Google Scholar
Doster, D.H. Indiana Custom Rates for Power Operated Farm Machines. Purdue University Cooperative Extension Service, Department of Agricultural Economics, West Lafayette, IN., 1992.Google Scholar
Environmental Protection Agency. National Survey of Pesticides in Drinking Water Wells: Phase Report. EPA 570/9-90-015, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 1990.Google Scholar
Feinerman, E., Choi, E.K., and Johnson, S.R.. “Uncertainty and Split Nitrogen Application in Corn Production.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 4 (1990):975–984.Google Scholar
Frank, M.D., Beattie, B.R., and Embleton, M.E.. “A Comparison of Alternative Crop Response Models.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 3(1990):597–603.Google Scholar
Hallberg, G.R. “Nitrate in Groundwater in the United States.” In Nitrogen Management and Groundwater Protection (Follett, R.F., ed.). Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishers, 1989.Google Scholar
Hanson, C.L., Cumming, K.A., Woolhiser, D.A., and Richardson, C.W.. Microcomputer Program for Daily Weather Simulation in the Contiguous United States. ARS-114, Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. 1994.Google Scholar
Hoeft, R. G. a professor in Department of Agronomy, University of Illinois. E-mail April 7, 1998.Google Scholar
Huang, W.Y. (1997). “Nutrient Management.” Chapter 4.5 in Agricultural Resources and Environmental Indicators, 1996—1997, Agricultural Handbook Number 712. Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, 1997.Google Scholar
Huang, W.Y., Hewitt, T.I., and Shank, D.. “An Analysis of On-Farm Costs of Timing N Applications to Reduce N Losses.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 23(1998):254–271.Google Scholar
Huang, W.Y., Uri, N.D., and Hansen, L.. Timing Nitrogen Fertilizer Applications to Reduce Nitrogen Losses: Assessing a Farmer's Decision on Application Timing. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington, DC, 1993.Google Scholar
Kott, P.S. and Fetter, M.. “A Multi-Phase Sample Design to Co-ordinate Surveys and Limit Response burden.” Paper presented at the Joint Statistical Meetings of the American Statistical Association, Washington, DC, 1997.Google Scholar
Meisinger, J.J. “Evaluating plant-available nitrogen in soil-crop systems.” Nitrogen in Crop Production. Madison, WI: Soil Science Society of America, 1984.Google Scholar
National Research Council. Alternative Agriculture. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1989.Google Scholar
Nelson, C.H. and Loehman, E.T. (1987). “Toward a Theory of Agricultural Insurance.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 69,3(1987): 525–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newbery, D.M.G. and Stiglitz, J.E.. The Theory of Commodity Price Stabilization. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1981.Google Scholar
Nielsen, E. and Lee, L.. The Magnitude and Cost of Ground Water Contamination from Agricultural Chemicals: A National Perspective. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington, DC, 1987.Google Scholar
Phipps, T.T. and Crosson, P.R.. Agriculture and the Environment: “Overview.” in Agriculture and the Environment, Phipps, T.T., Crosson, P.R., and Price, K.A. (eds.). Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, 1986.Google Scholar
Pratt, J.W. “Risk Aversion in the Small and in the Large.” Econometrica 32(1964):122–136.Google Scholar
Robison, L.J. and Barry, P.J.. The Competitive Firm's Response to Risk. New York: Macmillian Publishing Company, 1987.Google Scholar
SAS/STAT Users Guide, Volume 2, Version 6 Forth Edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina, 1990.Google Scholar
Skees, J.R., Black, J.R., and Barnett, B.J.. “Designing and Rating an Area Yield Crop Insurance Contract.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79(1997):430–438.Google Scholar
Tauer, L.W. “Risk Preferences of Dairy Farmers.” North Central Journal of Agricultural Economics 8(1986):7–15.Google Scholar
Taylor, H. 1997 AREI Update. Resource Economics Division, Economic Research, 1997. Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, 1997.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Statistical Reporting Service. Agricultural Statistics. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1992.Google Scholar
United States Environmental Protection Agency. National Survey of Pesticide in Drinking Water Well Phase I Report. EPA 570 9-90-015. Washington, DC, 1990.Google Scholar
Voss, R. and Shrader, W.. Crop Rotation: Effect on Yields and Response to N, Pm-905, Iowa State University Extension, Ames, IA, 1988.Google Scholar
Wilson, P.N. and Eidman, V.R.. “An Empirical Test of the Interval Approach for Estimating Risk Preference.” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 8(1993):170–182.Google Scholar