This study examines vertical coordination in the wine industry emerging in Illinois. We find that quality matters as temporal issues related to grape perishability increase the probability of written contracts being used to procure grapes. Holdup concerns related to sourcing adequate quality grapes and at-risk investments in grape storage and winemaking equipment lead to vertical integration. In general, larger wineries must obtain some grapes from outside vineyards and sell wine predominantly through tasting rooms and distributors. Smaller wineries rely more on direct sales to retailers, festivals, and farmers' markets. Marketing outlet selection also reflects the types of wine produced.

Agricultural education is defined by a best practice three-component model of instruction that

The primary purpose of the reported research was to evaluate the economic and environmental performance of three production systems under study in the Ohio Buried Valley Aquifer Management Systems Evaluation Area (MSEA) project. The three systems studied included a monoculture system—continuous corn (Zea mays L.) (chisel plow) with routine fertilizer and pesticide treatments; the typical system—a corn/soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] rotation (chisel plow and no‐till) with routine applications of pesticides and fertilizers; and an alternative system—a corn/soybean/wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)‐hairy vetch (Vicia villosa Roth subsp. villosa) rotation (ridge‐tilled) with fertilization based on soil tests and strategic applications of pesticides. Enterprise and whole farm budgets were constructed for each system. All sources of receipts and costs arising from production were recognized in the profitability analysis. The typical system was found to have the highest return to management and the monoculture system the lowest return. The alternative system produced net returns of about 50% of those of the typical system. The wheat phase of the alternative system was the primary source of reduced returns. A linear programming analysis was conducted to compare profitability for the three systems with farm size variable (machinery complement capacity was the determinant of farm size). The LP results suggested a widening of the profit differential between typical and alternative systems due to a greater acreage capacity for the typical system. However, results suggested that if wheat yieldls were increased through spring application of N fertilizer for wheat, the alternative system would be about equal in profits to the typical system. Environmental impact assessment, evaluated through use of the Erosion‐Productivity Impact Calculator (EPIC), suggested lesser environmental consequences resulting from the alternative system than from either of the other studied systems. Adjustments in the alternative system to improve profitability brought little environmental downside. Research Question The primary purpose of the reported research was to evaluate the economic and environmental performance of three production systems under study in the Ohio Buried Valley Aquifer Management Systems Evaluation Area (MSEA) project. Additionally, this research explores the differences in potential farm size that might be realized under selected alternative farming systems and how these size differentials might affect the financial performance of the farm. Literature Summary There have been a number of studies that report economic performance comparisons for various tillage system designs. Most studies have shown significant differences in fertilizer and herbicide/pesticide costs among systems. Differences in crop yields also have been observed by many researchers, although there is contradictory evidence as to this impact. Investments in durable capital assets, and in the resulting level of overhead costs, also have been shown to be important. Ho...

No abstract

No abstract