Premium
Risk Analysis of Tillage Alternatives with Government Programs
Author(s) -
Williams Jeffery R.,
Llewelyn Richard V.,
Barnaby G. Art
Publication year - 1990
Publication title -
american journal of agricultural economics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.949
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1467-8276
pISSN - 0002-9092
DOI - 10.2307/1243157
Subject(s) - sorghum , tillage , agronomy , conventional tillage , stochastic dominance , dominance (genetics) , commodity , economics , mathematics , environmental science , biology , econometrics , gene , market economy , biochemistry
Stochastic dominance analysis of two tillage systems, conventional tillage and no‐tillage, for five crop rotations, wheat‐fallow, grain sorghum‐fallow, continuous wheat, continuous grain sorghum, and wheat‐grain sorghum‐fallow, shows that risk‐averse managers prefer a conventional tillage wheat‐sorghum‐fallow system. Small changes in production costs or yields lead to indifference between this system and the no‐tillage wheat‐sorghum‐fallow and no‐till and conventional wheat‐fallow systems. Participation in the basic government commodity program generally increases average net returns and lowers variation of returns. Government commodity program payments calculated under a variety of scenarios do not generally encourage the use of no‐till practices for grain sorghum and wheat in the central Great Plains.