Survey and Experimental Techniques as an Approach for Agricultural Risk Analysis

  • Brian Roe
  • Alan Randall
Part of the Natural Resource Management and Policy book series (NRMP, volume 23)


The ubiquity and centrality of risk in agricultural processes helps define agricultural economics as a distinct field of study. Understanding agricultural agents’ behavioral responses to risk, and the implications of these responses for market behavior and agricultural policy, has occupied a central position in agricultural economics research. Much of this research has relied upon the analysis of agents’ behavior as observed and encoded by various public data collection agencies and private researchers. Simulation and programming techniques have also broadened our understanding of risk and extended the profession’s ability to provide prescriptive analysis to both individual decision makers and policy advisors. Such techniques often rely upon the analysis of observed behavioral responses to calibrate key parameters of the underlying models. However, calibration of individual risk preferences and identification of agents’ true behavioral objectives and constraints are often difficult, if not impossible, to obtain from observed behavior.


Risk Aversion Agricultural Economic Contingent Valuation Risk Preference Loss Aversion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allais, M. 1953. “Le Comportement de L’homme Rationnel Devant le Risque: Critique des Postulats et Axiomes de L’ecole Americaine.” Econometrica 21: 503–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderhub, V., W. Guth, W. Muller, and M. Strobel. 2000. “An Experimental Analysis of Intertemporal Allocation Behavior.” Experimental Economics 3: 137–152.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, J.D., C.E. Ward, S.R. Koontz, D.S. Peel, and J.N. Trapp. 1998. “Experimental Simulation of Public Information Impacts on Price Discovery and Marketing Efficiency in the Fed Cattle Market.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 23: 262–278.Google Scholar
  4. Arrow, K., R. Solow, P. Portney, E. Learner, R. Radner, and H. Schuman. 1993. Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation. Federal Register 58: 4601–4614.Google Scholar
  5. Azfar, O. 1999. “Rationalizing Hyperbolic Discounting.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 38: 245–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bard, S.K., and P.J. Barry. 1999. “Developing a Scale for Assessing Farmers’ Risk Attitudes.” Working Paper, Center for Farm and Rural Finance, University of Illinois, February 23.Google Scholar
  7. Belaid, A., and S.F. Miller. 1987. “Measuring Farmers’ Risk Attitudes: A Case Study of the Eastern High Plateau Region of Algeria.” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 12: 198–206.Google Scholar
  8. Benzion, U., A. Rapaport, and J. Yagil. 1989. “Discount Rates Inferred from Decisions: An Experimental Study.” Management Science 270–284.Google Scholar
  9. Bergstrom, J.C., and J.R. Stoll. 1989. “Application of Experimental Economics Concepts and Precepts to CVM Field Survey Procedures.” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 14: 98–109.Google Scholar
  10. Binswanger, H.P. 1980. “Attitudes Toward Risk: Experimental Measurement in Rural India.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 62: 395–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bishop, R.C., and T.A. Heberlein. 1979. “Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61: 926–930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brown, K.C., W. Van Harlow, and L.T. Starks. 1996. “Of Tournaments and Temptations: An Analysis of Managerial Incentives in the Mutual Fund Industry.” Journal of Finance 51: 85–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bull, C., A. Schotter, and K. Weigelt. 1987. “Tournaments and Piece Rates: An Experimental Study.” Journal of Political Economy 95: 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Buschena, D.E. 2001. “Non-Expected Utility: What Do the Anomalies Mean for Risk in Agriculture?” In R.E. Just and R.D. Pope, eds., A Comprehensive Assessment of the Role of Risk in U.S. Agriculture. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Camerer, C.F., and R. Hogarth. 1999. “The Effect of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 19: 7–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Camerer, C.F., and H. Kunreuther. 1989. “Decision Processes for Low Probability Events: Policy Implications.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 8: 565–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cameron, T.A. 1992. “Combining Contingent Valuation and Travel Cost Data for the Valuation of Nonmarket Goods.” Land Economics 68: 302–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carbone, E., and J. Hey. 1997. “How People Tackle Dynamic Decision Problems.” Mimeo, University of York.Google Scholar
  19. Chamberlin, E.H. 1948. “An Experimental Imperfect Market.” Journal of Political Economy 56: 95–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ciracy-Wantrup, S.V. 1947. “Capital Returns from Soil-Conservation Practices.” Journal of Farm Economics 29: 1181–1196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Collins, A., W.N. Musser, and R. Mason. 1991. “Prospect Theory and Risk Preferences of Oregon Seed Producers.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73: 429–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Davis, R.K. 1963. “The Value of Outdoor Recreation: An Economic Study of the Maine Woods.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  23. Dickie, M., A. Fisher, and S. Gerking. 1987. “Market Transactions and Hypothetical Demand Data: A Comparative Study.” Journal of American Statistical Association 82: 69–75.Google Scholar
  24. Dillon, J.L., and P.L. Scandizzo. 1978. “Risk Attitudes of Subsistence Farmers in Northeast Brazil: A Sampling Approach.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 60: 425–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ehrenburg, R.G., and M.L. Bognanno. 1990. “Do Tournaments Have Incentive Effects?” Journal of Political Economy 98: 1307–1324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Finkelshtain, I., and E. Feinerman. 1997. “Framing the Allais Paradox as a Daily Farm Decision Problem: Tests and Explanations.” Agricultural Economics 15: 155–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Forsythe, R., and R. Lundholm. 1990. “Information Aggregation in an Experimental Market.” Econometrica 58: 309–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fox, J., J. Shogren, D. Hayes, and J. Kliebenstein. 1998. “CVM-X: Calibrating Contingent Values with Experimental Auction Markets.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80: 455–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Francisco, E.M., and J.R. Anderson. 1972. “Chance and Choice West of the Darling.” Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics 16: 82–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ganderton, P.T., D.S. Brookshire, M. McKee, S. Stewart, and H. Thurston. 2000. “Buying Insurance for Disaster-Type Risks: Experimental Evidence.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 20: 271–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gigliotti, G., and B. Sopher. 1997. “Violations of Present-Value Maximization in Income Choice.” Theory and Decision 43: 45–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Grisley, W., and E.D. Kellogg. 1983. “Framers’ Subjective Probabilities in Northern Thailand: An Elicitation Analysis.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 65: 74–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gunjal, K., and B. Legault. 1995. “Risk Preferences of Dairy and Hog Producers in Quebec.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 43: 23–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hanemann, W.M. 1991. “Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?” American Economic Review 81: 635–647.Google Scholar
  35. Hausman, J. (ed.) 1993. Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Hoehn, J.P., and A. Randall. 1996. “Embedding in Market Demand Systems.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30: 369–380.Google Scholar
  36. Horowitz, J.K., and K.E. McConnell. Forthcoming. “A Review of WTP/WTA Studies.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.Google Scholar
  37. Howard, W.H., G.L. Brinkman, and R. Lambert. 1997. “Thinking Styles and Financial Characteristics of Selected Canadian Farm Managers.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 45: 39–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Isaac, R.M., and D. James. 2000. “Just Who Are You Calling Risk Averse?” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 20: 177–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. James, D., and R.M. Isaac. 2000. “Asset Markets: How They Are Affected by Tournament Incentives for Individuals.” American Economic Review 90: 995–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Just, R.E. 2000. “Some Guiding Principles for Empirical Production Research in Agriculture.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 29: 138–158.Google Scholar
  41. Just, R.E., and L. Calvin. 1994. “An Empirical Analysis of U.S. Participation in Crop Insurance.” In D.L. Hueth and W.H. Furtan, eds., Economics of Agricultural Crop Insurance: Theory and Evidence. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  42. Just, R.E., L. Calvin, and J. Quiggin. 1999. “Adverse Selection in Crop Insurance: Actuarial and Asymmetric Information Incentives.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81: 834–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kagel, J.H., and A.E. Roth. 1995. The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Knoeber, C.R. 1989. “A Real Game of Chicken: Contracts, Tournaments and the Production of Broilers.” Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 5: 271–292.Google Scholar
  45. List, J.A., and J.F. Shogren. 1998. “Calibration of the Difference between Actual and Hypothetical Valuations in a Field Experiment.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 37: 193–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Loewenstein, G., and J. Elster. 1992. Choice Over Time. New York: Russell Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  47. Mansfield, C. 1999. “Despairing Over Disparities: Explaining the Difference between Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept.” Environmental and Resource Economics 13: 219–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McClelland, G.H., W.D. Schulze, and D.L. Coursey. 1993. “Insurance for Low-Probability Hazards: A Bimodal Response to Unlikely Events.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 7: 95–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McFadden, D. 1999. “Rationality for Economists?” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 19: 73–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Muller, W. In press. “Strategies, Heuristics and the Relevance of Risk Aversion in a Dynamic Decision Problem.” Journal of Economic Psychology.Google Scholar
  51. Nalebuff, B.J., and J.E. Stiglitz. 1983. “Prizes and Incentives: Towards a General Theory of Compensation and Competition.” Bell Journal of Economics 14: 21–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Officer, R.R., and A.N. Halter. 1968. “Utility Analysis in a Practical Setting.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 50: 257–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pingali, P.L., and G.A. Carlson. 1985. “Human Capital, Adjustments in Subjective Probabilities, and the Demand for Pest Controls.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 67: 853–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Plott, C., and S. Sunder. 1982. “Efficiency of Experimental Security Markets with Insider Information: An Application of Rational-Expectations Markets.” Journal of Political Economy 90: 663–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Randall, A. 1998. “Beyond the Crucial Experiment: Mapping the Performance Characteristics of Contingent Valuation.” Resource and Energy Economics 20: 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Randall, A., B.C. Ives, and C. Eastman. 1974. “Bidding games for Valuation of Aesthetic Environmental Improvements.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 1: 132–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Randall, A., and J.R. Stoll. 1980. “Consumer’s Surplus in Commodity Space.” American Economic Review 70: 449–455.Google Scholar
  58. Roth, A.E. 1995. “Introduction to Experimental Economics.” In J.H. Kagel and A.E. Roth, eds., The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Schertz, L.P., and W.E. Johnston. 1997. “Managing Farm Resources in the Era of the 1996 Farm Act.” Market and Trade Economics Division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Staff Paper No. AGES 9711, December.Google Scholar
  60. Schmalensee, R. 1976. “An Experimental Study of Expectation Formation.” Econometrica 44: 17–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Swenson, C.W. 1997. “Rational Expectations and Tax Policy: Experimental Market Evidence.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 32: 433–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Thaler, R. 1981. “Some Empirical Evidence of Dynamic Inconsistency.” Economics Letters 201–207.Google Scholar
  63. Thurstone, L.L. 1931. “The Indifference Function.” Journal of Social Psychology 2: 129–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tsoulouhas, T., and T. Vukina. 1999. “Integrator Contracts with Many Agents and Bankruptcy.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81: 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman. 1991. “Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 106: 1039–1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wallis, W.A., and M. Friedman. 1942. “The Empirical Derivation of Indifference Functions.” In O. Lange, F. McIntyre, and T.O. Yntema, eds., Studies in Mathematical Economics and Econometrics in Memory of Henry Schultz. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  67. Ward, C.E., S.R. Koontz, T.L. Dowty, J.N. Trapp, and D.S. Peel. 1999. Marketing Agreement Impacts in an Experimental Market for Fed Cattle. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81: 347–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Ward, C.E., S.R. Koontz, D.S. Peel, and J.N. Trapp. 1996. “Price Discovery in an Experimental Market for Fed Cattle.” Review of Agricultural Economics 18: 449–466.Google Scholar
  69. Williams, A.W. 1987. “The Formation of Price Forecasts in Experimental Markets.” Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 19: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Young, D.L. 1979. “Risk Preferences of Agricultural Producers: Their Use in Extension and Research.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61: 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian Roe
    • 1
  • Alan Randall
    • 1
  1. 1.The Ohio State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations