Economic Comparison of Alternative Tillage Systems under Risk.

Abstract

Stochastic dominance efficiency criteria are used to rank the net farm return distributions for four different tillage systems under six different farm scenarios. Pairwise comparisons of tillage systems are carried over incremental upper and lower risk‐aversion coefficient (RAC) bounds identified for each farm scenario, based on the size and spread of the outcome distributions to identify regions where dominance may switch between tillage systems. Ridge‐till systems are generally the dominant tillage system for all farm scenarios considered. No‐till systems on clay loam soils are more dominant in the risk‐preferring range and less dominant in the risk‐averse range, which relates to the relatively larger range of net return values and smaller mean net return values generated by this tillage system. Conversely, the moldboard plow and chisel plow systems are more dominant in risk‐aversion intervals and less dominant in the risk‐preferring intervals for clay loam soils. In sandy soil scenarios, the ridge‐till and no‐till systems are dominant over the two fall tillage systems for all farm sizes, indicating that these tillage systems are more competitive with conventional tillage systems in lighter soil type situations. A sensitivity analysis between moldboard plow and no‐till systems indicates that no‐till would dominate in risk‐preferring intervals, and an increase in no‐till net farm returns of 16 per acre would change dominance in favor of no‐till in risk‐averse interval space. On a utilisé les critères d'efficacitéà dominance stochastique pour classer les divers niveaux de recettes agricoles nettes dans quatre systèmes différents de travail du sol, selon six scénarios d'exploitation. Des comparaisons en paires des systèmes de travail ont été faites en regard de tranches croissantes des limites supérieures et inférieures du coefficient d'aversion du risque (CER), établies pour chaque scénario d'après l'importance et l'étendue des distributions du rendement, dans le but d'identifier les régions où la dominance serait susceptible de passer d'un système de travail à l'autre. Le système de travail sur billons était en général le système dominant dans tous les scénarios d'exploitation examinés. La culture sans travail du sol sur loam argileux était plus dominante dans les intervalles d'acceptation du resque et moins dominante dans les intervalles d'aversion du resque, cequi s'explique au fait que ce système de travail donne lieu à une fourchette relativement plus large, mais aussi à une moyenne plus faible du revenu net. À l'inverse, le labour à la charrue classique et au chisel dominait davantage dans les intervalles d'aversion du risque. Dans les sols sableux, le travail sur billons et la culture sans labour l'emportaient sur les deux autres régimes dans toutes les tailles d'exploitation, ce qui porte à croire que, dans les sols plus légers, ces régimes sont plus concurrentiels avec les systèmes classiques. L'analyse de sensibilité entre le labour à la charrue et les systèmes sans travail du sol montre que ces dernier...

Promotion of weed species diversity and reduction of weed seedbanks with conservation tillage and crop rotation

“…This is mainly because of capital costs of new (no-tillage or chisel plow) equipment purchases in the period just before 1994 (in fact, they did not expect to see any gain until past 2000). Economic analyses in Ontario have reported similar annual profitability among tillage systems (Weersink et al 1992a(Weersink et al , 1992bYiridoe et al 1994Yiridoe et al , 2000 (Table 6). The association of the most abundant of these species, horseweed, with reduced tillage systems has long been recognized (Triplett and Lytle 1972), whereas this is the first published report of the occurrence in no tillage for many of these species.…”

“…Changes to farming practices, such as the adoption of conservation tillage, may present an unknown set of risks that can delay implementation by farmers (Weersink et al 1992a(Weersink et al , 1992bYiridoe et al 1994). Clements et al (1994) noted that changes in farm management systems will influence weed species diversity.…”

Stochastic Dominance Analysis of Soil and Water Conservation in Subsistence Crop Production in the Eastern Ethiopian Highlands: The Case of the Hunde-Lafto Area

“…It is an analytical technique that enables the ranking of two alternatives based on cumulative distributions The theoretical attractiveness of SD analysis lies in its non-parametric orientation, i.e., it does not require a full parametric specification of the preference of the decision-maker and the statistical distribution of the choice alternative (Williams 1988;Weersink et al 1992;Post 2002;Greene 2003). This flexibility is particularly important when the sample size is too small to permit the assessment of distributional assumption.…”

Economic Risk and Efficiency Assessment of Fisheries in Abu-Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (UAE): A Stochastic Approach

“…Boggess and Ritchie [23] and Williams et al [24] also present the rationale and application of various techniques. The theoretical attractiveness of stochastic dominance analysis lies in its non-parametric orientation, i.e., it does not require a full parametric specification of the preference of the decision-maker and the statistical distribution of the choice alternative [25][26][27].…”